Measurement in QM

  • I
  • Thread starter Silviu
  • Start date
  • #1
624
11
<Moderator's note: two essentially very similar threads merged.>

Hello! I am a bit confused about the idea of measurement in QM. As far as I understand, if you measure the position of a particle, the wavefunction of that particle changes into a delta function, and thus the particle gets localized. Now, let's say we have a particle in a box in a state with 3 main peaks (##\psi_3##). If we look at the main peak let's say (so the center of the box) and see the particle, the wave function collapsed at that point. But what happens if we don't see it there? Obviously, the wavefunction changes, as we know for sure that the probability of the particle being at that point is 0 now, but how is the wave function changed? Does it turn into a delta function at a random point, different from the one where we measured, or what?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
624
11
As far as I understood, in real world the wave function of a particle can have non-zero probability at any point in space. So if 2 observers at 2 ends of the universe observe this particle and one of them sees it (so the wave function collapses at his location) what happens to the other observer? Does the information within the wavefunction travels at an infinit speed (i.e. the value of the wavefuntion at the second observer gets instantaneously 0?)?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
1,116
72
Now just how are you planning to enter that box?
 
  • #4
624
11
Now just how are you planning to enter that box?
That was just an example. My question was what happens to the wave function if you don't see the particle at a point where the probability to find it was different from zero, before measurement.
 
  • #5
1,116
72
The wavefunction will evolve from that starting point and quickly settle down again.
 
  • #6
624
11
The wavefunction will evolve from that starting point and quickly settle down again.
But what is that starting point? Like assuming that before the measurement, the probability of finding the particle at position ##x_0## was 1/4. After the measurement, as the observer didn't see the particle, the probability goes to 0 (right?). However the wavefunction still needs to be continuous, so yeah, it gets equal to 0 at ##x_0##, but how does it behave at all the other points, what shape does it take?
 
  • #7
Orodruin
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
16,829
6,643
Measurements and decoherence are generally complicated issues. Using some simplification, the state is projected onto the subspace of states compatible with your measurement.
 
  • #8
624
11
Measurements and decoherence are generally complicated issues. Using some simplification, the state is projected onto the subspace of states compatible with your measurement.
What about the speed at which the wave function collapses?
 
  • #9
1,116
72
But what is that starting point? Like assuming that before the measurement, the probability of finding the particle at position ##x_0## was 1/4. After the measurement, as the observer didn't see the particle, the probability goes to 0 (right?). However the wavefunction still needs to be continuous, so yeah, it gets equal to 0 at ##x_0##, but how does it behave at all the other points, what shape does it take?
I would think it is the same as before with a little sliver missing.
 
  • #10
624
11
I would think it is the same as before with a little sliver missing.
Well I think so, too. But how do u express it mathematically? Like when u see it, it becomes a delta function. But when you don't see it, how do you describe it mathematically. So in the example I gave with 3 peaks in a particle in a box (assuming you can get inside the box :D), if I measure at the center of the box and I don't see anything and right after that I measure somewhere random in the first 1/3 of the box. Initially I had a chance of 1/3 to find the particle there, but now, after I measure the center without seeing anything, what are the chances to find the particle in the first 1/3 of the box (I assume it can't be also 1/3, otherwise it would mean that my first measurement had no influence on the wave function).
 
  • #11
1,116
72
I would go with the initial wavefunction less the delta function.
 
  • #12
624
11
I would go with the initial wavefunction less the delta function.
What do you mean by "less the delta function"? Something like ##\psi(x) - \delta(x_0)##?
 
  • #13
1,116
72
Yes.
 
  • #14
624
11
Yes.
But this is wrong. First, if you do the integral over space, you don't get 1 as the integral of ##\psi## is 1 (as it is the same function as before, except for 1 point), but the integral of delta function is also 1, so you get 0 in the end (let me know if there is something wrong about this reason). Secondly if you take the limit of ##\psi(x)## as ##x \to x_0##, one can see that the function is not continuous at ##x_0##, but it should be even after the measurement. So I am pretty sure this is not the mathematical form of the wavefunction after the measurement
 
  • #15
1,116
72
Agreed, If the amplitude reduces in a certain region it would need to increase elsewhere to be normalised. Why do you think the wavefunction is then discontinuous?
 
  • #16
624
11
Agreed, If the amplitude reduces in a certain region it would need to increase elsewhere to be normalised.
Yes! This is what I am asking. Where and why is that part of the wavefunction (which is now 0 for sure) distributed?
 
  • #17
1,116
72
Yes! This is what I am asking. Where and why is that part of the wavefunction (which is now 0 for sure) distributed?
All over, it all increases a bit.
 
  • #18
624
11
All over, it all increases a bit.
No! This is not possible, because of the continuity. At the points around the point where we measured, the value of the wavefunction must decrease, otherwise we have a discontinuity at ##x_0##, so it can't increases all over the place. So there are points where it goes up and points where it goes down, but again, how do you express it mathematically?
 
  • #19
1,116
72
You will appreciate that the wavefunction would evolve as expected (by the equations) only if the system is not tampered with?
 
  • #20
624
11
You will appreciate that the wavefunction would evolve as expected (by the equations) only if the system is not tampered with?
I am not sure I understand your question.
 
  • #21
1,116
72
I wondered if you were worried about the discontinuity in the time evolution.
 
  • #22
624
11
I wondered if you were worried about the discontinuity in the time evolution.
I am talking about the space discontinuity. Assuming the box has length 1, after our measurement we have ##\psi(0.5)=0##. So if immediately after this I measure let's say ##\psi(0.501)##, what value do I get? Of course it must be very close to 0, but how can I calculate it?
 
  • #23
1,116
72
Uncertainty in the initial measurement will screw up this situation.
 
  • #24
624
11
Uncertainty in the initial measurement will screw up this situation.
What uncertainty?
 
  • #25
PeterDonis
Mentor
Insights Author
2019 Award
30,733
9,727
What about the speed at which the wave function collapses?
There is no such thing. Wave function collapse is an adjustment of our model to take into account new information--the result of the measurement. It is not a change in the system being measured. (If there is such a change as a result of the measurement, and you really wanted to model it instead of just approximating it with a wave function collapse, you would have to switch to a much more complicated model.)
 

Related Threads on Measurement in QM

  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
10
Views
973
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
34
Views
5K
Top