Noncommuting observables and indeterminacy principle

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter microsansfil
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    observables Principle
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between noncommuting observables and the indeterminacy principle in quantum mechanics. Participants explore the implications of the commutation relation on measurement and uncertainty, as well as the concept of ensembles in quantum state preparations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Patrick questions the connection between noncommuting observables and the indeterminacy principle, particularly how the inability to measure two incompatible observables simultaneously leads to uncertainty.
  • One participant explains the general uncertainty relation and its dependence on the commutator of observables, emphasizing that it pertains to state preparations rather than measurement limitations.
  • Patrick seeks clarification on the meaning of "ensemble" in the context of measurements, asking whether it refers to successive measurements on the same system or simultaneous measurements on copies of the system.
  • Another participant clarifies that preparing the system repeatedly in the same state allows for repeated measurements of either observable, noting practical limitations with certain systems like photons.
  • Patrick expresses uncertainty about the practical application of the uncertainty relation and whether it holds when measuring observables A and B at different times.
  • A later reply affirms Patrick's summary of the uncertainty relation and inquires about the source of the information presented.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the theoretical framework of the uncertainty relation but express differing views on its practical implications and the interpretation of ensemble measurements. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specifics of measurement strategies and the nature of observables in repeated experiments.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of ensembles and the practical challenges of measuring certain observables, particularly in systems that are altered by measurement processes.

microsansfil
Messages
325
Reaction score
43
Hi all,

What is the link between noncommuting observables
{\displaystyle [{\hat {A}},{\hat {B}}]={\hat {A}}{\hat {B}}-{\hat {B}}{\hat {A}} \neq 0}
and indeterminacy principle (which is about inequality relation of standard deviation of the expectation value of observables A and B ) ?

If the observables commute we can find a complete set of simultaneous eigenvectors if not this implies that no quantum state can simultaneously be both A and B eigenstate. Why this implies that we cannot measure one without affecting statisticaly the other (uncertainty principle) ?

Is it possible to measure simultaneously the two incompatibles observables knowing that when a state is measured, it is projected onto an eigenstate in the basis of the relevant observable ?

best regards
Patrick
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The link between the commutator and the uncertainty principle is given by the general uncertainty relation, which follows directly from the positive definiteness of the Hilbert-space scalar product:
$$\Delta A \Delta B \geq \frac{1}{2} |\langle [\hat{A},\hat{B}] \rangle|,$$
where ##\Delta A## and ##\Delta B## are the standard deviations of observables ##A## and ##B##. All expectation values have to be taken using the state the system is prepared in according to Born's rule, i.e.,
$$\langle A \rangle=\mathrm{Tr}(\hat{\rho} \hat{A}),$$
where ##\hat{\rho}## is the state (statistical operator).

The uncertainty relation tells you about the limitation of state preparations, not limitations of measurements. You can always measure any observable with arbitrary precision, no matter in which state the system is prepared in.

Of course this refers to measurements on ensembles, i.e., generally you cannot have a single simultaneous measurement of two (or more) incompatible observables, but you can repeatedly prepare the system in the same quantum state and then measure with arbitrary precision the one or the other observable repeatedly. The found expectation values and standard deviations obey the uncertainty relation, and in fact to verify it you have to measure the observables on ensembles of equally prepared systems in the above given sense with much higher accuracy than the standard deviations due to state preparation. If the measurement resolution is larger than the standard deviation due to the state preparation, you'll not have sufficient precision to resolve the uncertainty due to the state but only that due to the used measurement device.
 
Thank for the answer

vanhees71 said:
Of course this refers to measurements on ensembles, i.e., generally you cannot have a single simultaneous measurement of two (or more) incompatible observables, but you can repeatedly prepare the system in the same quantum state and then measure with arbitrary precision the one or the other observable repeatedly. The found expectation values and standard deviations obey the uncertainty relation, and in fact to verify it you have to measure the observables on ensembles of equally prepared systems in the above given sense

1/ the concept of the ensemble does it mean :

successive measurements of A done on the same system (same quantum pur state ?) and measurements of B done on the same system ?
or
measurements of A done simultaneously on copies of the system (same quantum pur state ?) and measurements of B done simultaneously on copies of the system ?
or
other meaning ?2/ When we repeatedly prepare the system in the same quantum state, does A and B observable could be considered as independent and identically distributed random variables (IID) ?

Best regards
Patrick
 
What I meant is to prepare the system repeatedly in the same state and then measure repeatedly either A or B. Of course you can always prepare the same system again and again or always use a new one. E.g., for photons usually you can only do the latter since usually detecting them destroys them since usually the detection applies the photoelectric effect.
 
I am taking note that in fact the uncertainty relation can be deduced mathematically from the inequality relationship of Cauchy-Schwarz. This demonstration is clear, but its pratical setting up remains unclear to me.

If I prepare a system repeatedly in the same state and then I measure repeatedly A, I can calculate ΔA. Then an hour later I prepare the same experiment repeatedly in the same state and then I measure repeatedly B I can calculate ΔB. In this situation the relation

\Delta A \Delta B \geq \frac{1}{2} |\langle [\hat{A},\hat{B}] \rangle| is always verified ?

upload_2018-1-5_7-8-26.png


Best regards
Patrick
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-1-5_7-8-26.png
    upload_2018-1-5_7-8-26.png
    18.2 KB · Views: 420
Yes, you summarized the meaning of the uncertainty relation in a very clear way. Also the excerpt from your source (textbook?) is very good. Which one is it?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K