Question about measurement and unitary dynamics

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion addresses the tension between unitary evolution and state reduction in quantum mechanics, particularly during measurement. The observer, as part of the composite system with the observed entity, experiences a non-unitary evolution due to entanglement, leading to an increase in von Neumann entropy. The conversation highlights that while the combined system evolves unitarily, the observer perceives a non-unitary evolution of the reduced system. The Copenhagen and Many Worlds interpretations are referenced as frameworks for understanding measurement outcomes and state reduction.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, specifically unitary evolution and measurement.
  • Familiarity with density operators and von Neumann entropy.
  • Knowledge of the Copenhagen interpretation and Many Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics.
  • Basic grasp of quantum entanglement and its implications for measurement.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of quantum entanglement on measurement outcomes.
  • Explore the differences between the Copenhagen interpretation and the Many Worlds interpretation.
  • Learn about density operators and their role in quantum state evolution.
  • Investigate the concept of von Neumann entropy in quantum systems.
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, students of quantum mechanics, and researchers exploring the foundations of quantum theory and measurement processes.

S.Daedalus
Messages
221
Reaction score
7
This is a question that's been in the back of my mind since I first learned quantum mechanics.

There seems to me to be some tension between the postulates of unitary evolution and state reduction upon measurement: basically, any quantum system ought to evolve unitarily; so in principle, every observer is a quantum system, so it ought to be possible to take the composite of the observer and the system she observes, treat it as a quantum system, and have it evolve unitarily. But then, where does the non-unitary reduction (i.e. the 'wave-function collapse') entailed by measurement come from?

Is it just that, if you have the system \rho_{OS}, i.e. the system made from the combination of the observer O and the observed system S, this will in general be highly entangled, since observation necessitates interaction, so the observer 'sees' the reduced system \mathrm{Tr}_O(\rho_{OS}), with herself 'traced out', which typically will have some von Neumann entropy -- which will tend to grow over time, as the entanglement grows with further observation, and since only non-unitary dynamics lead to rising entropy, the observer will tend to see non-unitary dynamics, even though the system made of herself and the observed system evolves unitarily?

Ugh, this turned into a bit of a run-on sentence. To be more clear, the observer is part of the system made out of the observer herself, and the observed system, described by the density operator \rho_{OS}. However, she 'sees', from the inside, only the reduced system \rho_S = \mathrm{Tr}_O(\rho_{OS}). As the system \rho_{OS} evolves unitarily, as all (closed) quantum systems do, the observer 'sees' a nonunitary evolution of \rho_{S}, since entanglement between herself and the system she observes tends to grow, and thus, so does the von Neumann entropy of \rho_{S}. Is that where the nonunitarity of measurement comes from?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, this can be used to explain the measurement process, which is done in the Many Worlds interpretation and the ensemble interpretation.

However, it depends crucially on what density operators ρ and kets |ψ> are supposed to mean. Let's consider a simple example along your line of reasoning. We have a two-niveau system which initially is in a superposition state |ψ>=|ψ1>+|ψ2>. This state evolves into a mixed state ρ due to interactions with the environment given by the measurement apparatus. So there is non-unitarian time evolution in all interpretations, but it doesn't necessarily explain the reduction of the state vector. You start in a probabilistic state and you end up in a probabilistic state, but in experiments you always see definite outcomes.

The Copenhagen interpretation thus postulates, that performing a measurement reduces the state to one possibility. In the Many Worlds interpretation for example, all outcomes are equally real, so the explanation above explains the whole measurement process.
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 89 ·
3
Replies
89
Views
8K
  • · Replies 212 ·
8
Replies
212
Views
27K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K