A Question on Zeno time derivation

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter Mainframes
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derivation
Mainframes
Messages
17
Reaction score
3
Hi,

I'm trying to follow the derivation of the Zeno time from two sources and am struggling. I think I'm missing some sort of algebraic trick and any tips would be appreciated. A bit more detail below.

In the attached paper \citep{Facchi_2008}, the Zeno time (equation (6)) is derived from equation (4) and equation (5), but I don't see how.

1705786258003.png


In the second attached paper \citep{PhysRevA.89.042116}, the Zeno time is derived in equation (1.6) though I cannot even see how how equation (1.3) is derived (let alone the Zeno time).

1705786470408.png
REFERENCES

@article{Facchi_2008,
doi = {10.1088/1751-8113/41/49/493001},
url = {https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/41/49/493001},
year = {2008},
month = {oct},
publisher = {},
volume = {41},
number = {49},
pages = {493001},
author = {P Facchi and S Pascazio},
title = {Quantum Zeno dynamics: mathematical and physical aspects},
journal = {Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical},
}

@article{PhysRevA.89.042116,
title = {Classical limit of the quantum Zeno effect by environmental decoherence},
author = {Bedingham, D. and Halliwell, J. J.},
journal = {Phys. Rev. A},
volume = {89},
issue = {4},
pages = {042116},
numpages = {17},
year = {2014},
month = {Apr},
publisher = {American Physical Society},
doi = {10.1103/PhysRevA.89.042116},
url = {https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.89.042116}
}
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
Hint: ##P## and ##Q## are projectors, i.e. ##P^2=P##, ##Q^2=Q##, ##PQ=QP=0##.
 
Demystifier said:
Hint: ##P## and ##Q## are projectors, i.e. ##P^2=P##, ##Q^2=Q##, ##PQ=QP=0##.

Thank you very much for your reply. I did try using those relationships (and I understand why they are true), however, I still could not get the algebra to work.

Furthermore, in equation (1.3) of the below extract frrom \citep{PhysRevA.89.042116}, I cannot even see how the ##\epsilon^2## term on the RHS of the equation (1.3) is possible. The reason for this is that I believe any ##\epsilon^2## term on the LHS would be of the form ##\frac{\epsilon^2}{\hbar^2}##.

This, together with my inability to get the algebra to match, led me to believe I am missing something else fundamental.
1705827783054.png
 
Mainframes said:
Thank you very much for your reply. I did try using those relationships (and I understand why they are true), however, I still could not get the algebra to work.
First observe that from ##P=|\psi_0\rangle\langle\psi_0|## we have
$$P|\psi_0\rangle = |\psi_0\rangle , \;\;\; Q|\psi_0\rangle = 0.$$
The goal is to compute
$$\tau_Z^{-2} = \langle\psi_0|H^2| \psi_0\rangle - \langle\psi_0|H| \psi_0\rangle^2.$$
The second term is proportional to
$$\langle\psi_0|H| \psi_0\rangle^2=
\langle\psi_0|H| \psi_0\rangle \langle\psi_0|H| \psi_0\rangle
= \langle\psi_0|HPH| \psi_0\rangle ,$$
while the first term is
$$\langle\psi_0|H^2| \psi_0\rangle = \langle\psi_0| PH(Q+P)HP | \psi_0\rangle$$
$$=\langle\psi_0| PHQHP | \psi_0\rangle + \langle\psi_0| PHPHP | \psi_0\rangle$$
$$=\langle\psi_0| PHQQHP | \psi_0\rangle + \langle\psi_0| HPH | \psi_0\rangle$$
$$=\langle\psi_0| H_{int}^2 | \psi_0\rangle + \langle\psi_0| H | \psi_0\rangle^2 .$$
Combining all this we get
$$\tau_Z^{-2} = \langle\psi_0| H_{int}^2 | \psi_0\rangle$$
which is Eq. (6).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Lord Jestocost and Nugatory
Demystifier said:
First observe that from ##P=|\psi_0\rangle\langle\psi_0|## we have
$$P|\psi_0\rangle = |\psi_0\rangle , \;\;\; Q|\psi_0\rangle = 0.$$
The goal is to compute
$$\tau_Z^{-2} = \langle\psi_0|H^2| \psi_0\rangle - \langle\psi_0|H| \psi_0\rangle^2.$$
The second term is proportional to
$$\langle\psi_0|H| \psi_0\rangle^2=
\langle\psi_0|H| \psi_0\rangle \langle\psi_0|H| \psi_0\rangle
= \langle\psi_0|HPH| \psi_0\rangle ,$$
while the first terms is
$$\langle\psi_0|H^2| \psi_0\rangle = \langle\psi_0| PH(Q+P)HP | \psi_0\rangle$$
$$=\langle\psi_0| PHQHP | \psi_0\rangle + \langle\psi_0| PHPHP | \psi_0\rangle$$
$$=\langle\psi_0| PHQQHP | \psi_0\rangle + \langle\psi_0| HPH | \psi_0\rangle$$
$$=\langle\psi_0| H_{int}^2 | \psi_0\rangle + \langle\psi_0| H | \psi_0\rangle^2 .$$
Combining all this we get
$$\tau_Z^{-2} = \langle\psi_0| H_{int}^2 | \psi_0\rangle$$
which is Eq. (6).
This is brilliant. Thank you so much for this (it has certainly Demystified the result to me)
 
  • Like
Likes Demystifier
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!

Similar threads

Back
Top