Undergrad Is there a reason eigenvalues of operators correspond to measurements?

Click For Summary
The relationship between eigenvalues of Hermitian operators and measurement outcomes in quantum mechanics is primarily a postulate, indicating that the eigenvalue corresponds to the observable's measured value. While eigenvalues serve as labels for potential outcomes, they do not always represent the actual measurement results. More complex measurement frameworks, such as Positive Operator-Valued Measures (POVMs), extend beyond traditional projective measurements, suggesting that labels may not strictly be eigenvalues. Additionally, the indirect measurement formalism illustrates that eigenvalues may not directly equate to outcomes. This highlights the nuanced nature of measurement in quantum mechanics.
gsingh2011
Messages
115
Reaction score
1
Given a wave function \Psi which is an eigenstate of a Hermitian operator \hat{Q}, we can measure a definite value of the observable corresponding to \hat{Q}, and the value of this observable is the eigenvalue Q of the eigenstate
$$
\hat{Q}\Psi = Q\Psi
$$
My question is whether it's a postulate of quantum mechanics that the eigenvalue of the eigenstate corresponds to the value we measure, or is there a more fundamental reason/proof for this being the case?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's a postulate.
 
The eigenvalues are labels for the outcomes. In general, an eigenvalue need not be the outcome itself.

There are also more general measurements (called POVMs) than projective measurements, and the labels here are not necessarily eigenvalues: https://arxiv.org/abs/0706.3526

One way to see that the eigenvalue is just a label for an outcome, and not necessarily literally the outcome itself is to use the indirect measurement formalism: https://arxiv.org/abs/1110.6815
 
  • Like
Likes Truecrimson and vanhees71
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
838
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
744