Operators for measuring superposition component distinctnes?

In summary, an operator that determines the "distinctness" of superposition components can be theoretically defined. However, there are no known real-world applications for such an operator.
  • #1
Agrippa
78
10
Hello,

I'm wondering, is it possible to define an operator that gives information about the "distinctness" of superposition components?

As a simple example, imagine that we have two particles. Let |3> designate the state in which they are 3 meters apart, let |5> designate the state in which they are 5 meters apart, and |7> for seven metres apart. Now imagine the three possible states:

(s1) a|3> + b|3> = |3>
(s2) a|3> + b|5>
(s3) a|3> + b|7>

Where a and b are amplitudes such that |a|2+|b|2=1.
Is it possible to define an operator that gives a null result for s1 (no distinctness) while giving nonzero values for s2 and s3 and ranking them so that s3 gets a higher value (more distinct?)?

If there are real quantum mechanical applications for such operators I would be very interested to learn of them. If there are no known applications even though they are nonetheless in principle definable, then I would still be very interested.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
It's not an expression. It's a physical entity.

Superposition = information based on preparation.
Thus, you have presented us three different preparations, three different physical systems.
Surely there must be a way to tell them apart.

If those are systems where "internal space/distance" of meter scale plays a role, then they must have... charge? (Or mass). This, with distance, translates to some potential energy...
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Agrippa said:
If there are real quantum mechanical applications for such operators I would be very interested to learn of them. If there are no known applications even though they are nonetheless in principle definable, then I would still be very interested.

The variance can be derived from any operator, although I don't think its an operator itself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurement_in_quantum_mechanics

If its zero then that state will always give that outcome if observed.

Its used in the general proof of the uncertainty principle.

Thanks
Bill
 
  • #4
bhobba said:
The variance can be derived from any operator, although I don't think its an operator itself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurement_in_quantum_mechanics
If its zero then that state will always give that outcome if observed.
QM variance refers to variation in possible measurement outcomes for specific observable given specific state.
So if state is |Ψ> and |Ψ> is an eigenstate of observable O then variance [<Ψ|O2|Ψ> - (<Ψ|O|Ψ>)2] = zero; meaning no variance.
If instead state is noneigenstate of O and O is two-valued (e.g. spin observable) then variance = one; meaning (I think) one variation i.e. two possible outcomes.

That's not quite what I'm after.
I'm not looking for a measure of the variation of possible measurement outcomes given state and observable.
I'm looking for a measure of the variation of superposition components given a state and a basis (which defines those components).

I think what will do the trick is a linear map in the Hilbert space that maps the vectors mentioned above (s1, s2, s3, etc.) to positive real-valued multiples of the basis vectors (of which |3>, |5>, |7> are examples). Those vectors are eigenvectors whose eigenvalues measure the relevant variance. For example, s1 will get mapped to a basis vector with eigenvalue 0, s2 will get mapped to a basis vector with eigenvalue 2 etc. (I think only one basis vector V need be used here, since the ray along which it lies (its 1D subspace) will contain all the desired values. )

This will be a non-hermitian operator: eigenvectors of a Hermitian operator (that don't share the same eigenvalue) are all mutually orthogonal. This does not hold for my operator. But such a non-Hermitian operator is still a well-defined operator (I think).

bhobba said:
Its used in the general proof of the uncertainty principle.
The link was helpful but I couldn't find discussion of use of variance to derive uncertainty principle.
 

1. What is superposition and why is it important in quantum mechanics?

Superposition is a fundamental principle in quantum mechanics that states a particle can exist in multiple states simultaneously until it is observed. This concept is important because it helps explain the behavior of subatomic particles and has led to advancements in technology such as quantum computing.

2. How do operators measure superposition component distinctness?

Operators, such as the Pauli matrices, are used in quantum mechanics to measure the distinctness of superposition components. They represent different physical quantities, such as spin or position, and their corresponding eigenvalues indicate the distinctness of the superposition components.

3. Can superposition component distinctness be measured accurately?

In quantum mechanics, measurement is inherently probabilistic, so it is impossible to measure the distinctness of superposition components with 100% accuracy. However, operators can provide information about the probabilities of different outcomes, allowing for accurate predictions.

4. How does measuring superposition component distinctness affect the state of a particle?

When a particle in superposition is measured, the act of observation causes it to collapse into one of its possible states. The specific outcome is determined by the probabilities associated with the different superposition components, as determined by the operator being used.

5. Are there other ways to measure superposition component distinctness besides operators?

While operators are the most commonly used method for measuring superposition component distinctness, there are other techniques such as quantum tomography or state estimation. These methods involve reconstructing the state of a quantum system based on measurements of different observables.

Similar threads

  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
24
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
697
Replies
2
Views
960
Replies
3
Views
794
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
925
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
12
Views
2K
Back
Top