Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Theoretical investigation of the relations between quantum decoherence and weak-to-strong measurement transition

Published 30 Apr 2024 in quant-ph | (2404.19488v1)

Abstract: This paper delves into the crucial aspects of pointer-induced quantum decoherence and the transition between von Neumann's projective strong measurement and Aharonov's weak measurement. Both phenomena significantly impact the dynamical understanding of quantum measurement processes. Specifically, we focus on the interplay between quantum decoherence and the transition from weak to strong measurement by deducing and comparing the quantum decoherence and weak-to-strong measurement transition factors within a general model and using the well-known Stern-Gerlach experiment as an illustrative example. Our findings reveal that both phenomena can be effectively characterized by a universal transition factor intricately linked to the coupling between the system and the measurement apparatus. The analysis presented can clarify the mechanism behind the relations of quantum decoherence to the weak measurement and weak-to-strong measurement transition.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (23)
  1. A. Peres, Quantum Theory: Concepts and Method (Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995).
  2. Y. Aharonov and D. Rohrlich, Quantum Paradoxes-Quantum Theory for the Perplexed (Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2005).
  3. J. J. Sakurai and J. Napolitano, Modern quantum mechanics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2020).
  4. M. Schlosshauer (2007).
  5. H. P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007).
  6. H. D. Zeh, Found. Phys 1, 69 (1970).
  7. W. H. Zurek, Phys. Rev. D 24, 1516 (1981).
  8. W. H. Zurek, Phys. Rev. D 26, 1862 (1982).
  9. E. Joos and H. D. Zeh, Z. Phys. B 59, 223 (1985).
  10. W. H. Zurek, “Reduction of the wavepacket: How long does it take?” in Frontiers of Nonequilibrium Statistical Physics (Springer US, Boston, MA, 1986) pp. 145–149.
  11. W. H. Zurek, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 715 (2003).
  12. M. Schlosshauer, Rev. Mod. Phys. 76, 1267 (2005).
  13. M. Schlosshauer, Physics Reports 831, 1 (2019), quantum decoherence.
  14. e. a. Viza, Gerardo, Optics letters 38, 2949 (2013).
  15. B. E. Y. Svensson, Quanta 2, 18 (2013).
  16. D. Sokolovski, Quanta 2, 50 (2013).
  17. A. G. Ferraioli and C. Noce, Science and Philosophy 7, 41 (2019).
  18. M. Ban, Quantum Stud- Math. Fd 2, 263 (2015).
  19. A.-S. Kevin and M. Orszag, Phys. Rev. A 103 (2021).
  20. C.-P. Sun and Q. Xiao, Commun. Theor. Phys 16, 359 (1991).
  21. Y. Aharonov and L. Vaidman, J. Phys. A 24, 2315 (1991).
  22. Y. Aharonov and L. Vaidman, “The two-state vector formalism: An updated review,” in Time in Quantum Mechanics, edited by J. Muga, R. S. Mayato,  and Í. Egusquiza (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008) pp. 399–447.
  23. R. Jozsa, Phys. Rev. A 76, 044103 (2007).

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 1 tweet with 1 like about this paper.