What's the difference between these two equations?

baouba
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
say we have some wavefunction |psi> and we want to find the probability of this wavefunction being in the state |q>. I get that the probability is given by P = |<q|psi>|^2 since we're projecting the wavefunction onto the basis state |q> then squaring it to give the probability density.

However what if we want to measure some observable quantity corresponding to some operator Q with one (of multiple) associated eigenstate |q>, and then find the probability that the system is in a state |q> after being observed. Would probability then be P = |<q|Q|psi>|^2 since I'm collapsing the wavefunction then projecting it onto the basis state |q>?

But say I didn't make a measurement of the system (not apply Q to |psi>) I get the original result. In these two cases I get a different answer do I not? In both cases I'm finding the probability of the wavefunction being in state |q>. Why are the answers different and what do |<q|psi>|^2 and |<q|Q|psi>|^2 fundamentally mean?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
##|\langle q_n |\psi\rangle|^2## is the one with probabilistic interpretation.
Note that ##|\langle q_n |Q|\psi\rangle|^2 = |q_n|^2## where ##q_n## is the eigenvalue corresponding to the eigenstate ##|q_n\rangle## and it's obviously not a value which can be associated to be a probability.
To emphasize again, ##|\langle q_n |\psi\rangle|^2## is the one with probabilistic interpretation. This follows from the average value of ##Q## (the average value is used here because it connects the theory and experiment) when measured repeatedly over a state ##|\psi\rangle##
$$
\langle \psi |Q|\psi\rangle = \sum_n q_n |\langle q_n |\psi\rangle|^2
$$
Since the LHS is interpreted as an average, the ## |\langle q_n |\psi\rangle|^2## in the RHS must be the frequency distribution which gives a measure of how often a measurement result with ##q_n## occurs.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Replies
21
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
31
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
949
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
0
Views
1K
Back
Top