Notion of a "clock" in Quantum Mechanics

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of a "clock" in quantum mechanics, specifically whether the time-evolved state represented by the unitary operator can be considered a time-keeping device. Participants explore the implications of time evolution in quantum systems and the conditions under which observables might serve as clocks.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions if the time-evolved state can be viewed as a clock, seeking clarification on its usefulness.
  • Another participant suggests that any observable phenomenon that behaves non-uniformly in time qualifies as a clock.
  • A different viewpoint argues against the notion of the time-evolved state as a clock, stating that the unitary operator describes time evolution without measurement, which is necessary for a time-keeping device.
  • It is proposed that, with certain caveats, an observable can function as a clock, referencing John Baez's article for further context.
  • A reference is made to a paper by Unruh and Wald, which claims that no dynamical variable can act as a perfect clock due to the possibility of "running backwards."

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the time-evolved state can be considered a clock, with some arguing against it and others suggesting that certain observables may qualify. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the conditions under which a clock can be defined in quantum mechanics.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the definitions of "clock" and the assumptions about measurement in quantum mechanics that are not fully explored in the discussion.

WWCY
Messages
476
Reaction score
15
TL;DR
Unitary evolution and "timekeeping"
Suppose the unitary operator ##e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\hat{H}t}## acts on ##|\psi (0) \rangle##, does it make sense for one to think of the time-evolved state as some sort of time-keeping device? If not, why? If so, is such a notion useful?

Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well any observable phenomenon which behaves non-uniformly in time is a clock
 
WWCY said:
does it make sense for one to think of the time-evolved state as some sort of time-keeping device?

No, because that unitary operator is for time evolution in the absence of any measurement, and in order to use anything as a time keeping device, you have to be able to make measurements on it to see what its reading is.

It is possible, with some caveats, to find an observable (as distinct from a time-evolved quantum state) that can function as a "clock"; see John Baez' article here:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/uncertainty.html
 
Unruh, W.G., Wald, R. (1989). Time and the interpretation of canonical quantum gravity, Physical Review D 40(8), 2598-2614 prove the following:
no dynamical variable in a system with Hamiltonian bounded from below can act as a perfect clock in the sense that there is always a nonvanishing amplitude for any realistic dynamical variable to "run backwards".
 
Thanks for the replies, cheers!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
352
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
600
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K