Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Quantum Zeno Effect: What is the argument?

  1. Jan 21, 2014 #1
    Every general explanation of the quantum zeno effect I've found is (from my perspective) so full of gaps that I cannot understand the explanation. I am wondering if anyone can help me fill in the gaps here?

    The most detailed explanation I've found runs something like this:

    Let |ψ0> be the initial quantum state of a system at time 0 and let |ψt> be its state at some later time t.

    The dynamical evolution of the system is described by a unitary operator U(t) that is a complex function of the initial system's Hamiltonian: U(t) = e-iHt. Thus: |ψt> = U(t)|ψ0>.

    The "survival" probability Ps that the system will still be in the initial state at t is given by:

    Ps = |<ψ0t>|2 = |<ψ0|e-iHt0>|2

    So far so good. But now standard explanations assert that:

    Ps = |<ψ0|e-iHt0>|2 = 1 - (ΔH)2t2
    (Where (ΔH)2 = <ψ0|H20> - (<ψ0|H|ψ0>)2)

    Where does that come from? Is it meant to be obvious that 1 - (ΔH)2t2 follows from the left hand side?

    At any rate, we can now define the Zeno time Z = 1/ΔH so that:

    Ps = 1 - [itex]\frac{t^{2}}{Z^{2}}[/itex]

    Presumably this shows that as t gets smaller the probability tends to 1 so that the faster we measure the system after time = 0 the more probable it will be found in its initial state.

    Now for the final bit. If we consider N measurements then we can understand the survival probability given those N measurements as:

    P[itex]^{N}_{s}[/itex] = (1 - [itex]\frac{t^{2}}{N^{2}Z^{2}}[/itex])N

    ...so that in the limit of continuous measurements where N → ∞ we get:

    [itex]\stackrel{Lim}{N→∞}[/itex] P[itex]^{N}_{s}[/itex] = 1

    I just don't see how this final bit follows. After all, if t is large then increasing N won't bring on the QZE. Surely we also need t → 0 but I don't see how the above accounts for this.

    Any help would be most appreciated, thanks.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 21, 2014 #2

    Demystifier

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    A few more details can be found, e.g., in
    http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/1311.4363
    Read everything from Eq. (2) to Eq. (9).
    In particular, in calculating the final limit, t is neither very large nor close to 0.
    I hope it helps.
     
  4. Jan 21, 2014 #3

    strangerep

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    If you wish to understand such things properly, you should also study (carefully!) Ballentine section 12.2 pp338-343.

    I'm happy to (try and) fill in any details more explicitly, but only after you've read Ballentine -- so that I don't have to repeat textbook stuff here. :biggrin:
     
  5. Jan 22, 2014 #4

    wle

    User Avatar

    It's an approximation valid for small [itex]t[/itex] (obviously, because the expression becomes negative for [itex]t > \Delta H[/itex]). You can obtain it by expanding the exponential as

    [tex]e^{-iHt} = \mathbb{1} - i H t - \tfrac{1}{2} H^{2} t^{2} + \dotsb[/tex]
    and only keeping the terms up to order [itex]t^{2}[/itex] in the expression you get for the survival probability.


    You do measure after time intervals that become arbitrarily small. Instead of doing a single measurement after a time [itex]t[/itex], you perform [itex]N[/itex] successive measurements at time intervals [itex]\delta t = \frac{t}{N}[/itex]. That's why the [itex]\frac{t^{2}}{Z^{2}}[/itex] changes to [itex]\frac{t^{2}}{N^{2} Z^{2}}[/itex] in the expression for the survival probability.

    As for the limit itself, there's more than one approach that might work. One way is to factor [itex]1 - \frac{t^{2}}{N^{2} Z^{2}}[/itex] as [itex]\bigl( 1 + \frac{t}{N Z} \bigr) \bigl( 1 - \frac{t}{N Z} \bigr)[/itex] and use that [itex]\lim_{n \to \infty} \bigl( 1 + \frac{x}{n} \bigr)^{n} = e^{x}[/itex].
     
  6. Jun 21, 2015 #5
    I also tryed to understand this calculation and still dont get it. Can someone please help me with the next step after the expanding of the exponential?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Quantum Zeno Effect: What is the argument?
  1. Quantum Zeno Effect (Replies: 3)

Loading...