What is the collapse state after measuring Sx?

Lengalicious
Messages
162
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



So say I have a 1 qubit normalised state |ψ> = 1/√N(c1|z+> - c2|z->) and I make the measurement Sx and the measurement yields +hbar/2
as |x+> is a superposition of both z+ & z- basis eigenstates does the collapsed state end up the same as the original state? Or would I need to take the inner product of <x+|ψ> to find the collapsed state? Confused. .

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



Its not really a direct homework problem its more of an understanding thing so my attempt is above in 1.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It doesn't matter what the original state is. If you know that the outcome of a measurement is "spin up" along the x axis, then the collapsed wave function is simply |x+>, independent of the original state |ψ>.

The complex number <x+|ψ> is the probability amplitude that the outcome of the measurement yields |x+>. If <x+|ψ> happened to be zero, then it would have been impossible for the measurement outcome to be spin up along x.

As long as <x+|ψ> is nonzero, then there is a nonzero probability |<x+|ψ>|2 that the outcome is spin up along x. If it does turn out that the outcome is spin up along x, then the measurement has collapsed |ψ> to |x+>
 
Ok great, that clears things up a lot, thanks!
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top