Thursday, 30 July 2020

quantum mechanics - Is this analysis contradictory with the 2'nd measurment?


Summary and Motivation


"The below idea is about making a mathematical statement on system 2 which induces a measurement on system 1 while 1+2 obeys unitary evolution."


Basically, I'm modelling the measurement (occurring at time t) as an interaction and that I have some constraints based on the conditions before (˜t)and after (˜t+)


Introduction


There are 2 systems 1 and 2. Let the Hamiltonian of system 1 be H1 and let it be in an energy eigenstate:


ˆH1|Em=Em|Em


Now, a measurement is done (forcing the system to a momentum eigenstate):



ˆp|pj=pj|pj


This measurement must me induced by a another system (see here why I think so: Energy cost of the measurement without perturbing the system? ). Let the Hamiltonian of this system be H2. Let us express the net Hamiltonian as:


ˆHnet=ˆH1+ˆH2+ˆHint(1,2)


Where, Hint(1,2) is the interaction Hamiltonian between the systems. But let us consider another system before we proceed:


ˆHnon-int=ˆH1ˆ1+ˆ1ˆH2


where ˆ1 is the identity matrix. In the non-interacting case we have a separable wave function:


|ψnon-int=|ψ1|ψ2=|ψ1,ψ2


where |ψ1 and |ψ2 are the wave functions of system 1 and 2, respectively.



Now, I know something about the time-evolution of system 1 and I know the net system 1+2 obeys unitarity. Hence, I should be able to use this to say something about system 2.




After doing some "calculations" I got the following equation (first-order strong summation condition):


0=λnψ(0)n| ψnetψ2|Eλψ(1)λ|ψ(0)n=nψ(0)n| ψnetψnon-int|ψ(1)n


Questions


Now let's say I want to perform a measurement on |ψnet does the above equation add an additional constraint? If so does it interfere with the usual measurement postulates (and how badly) |ψnet|eigenstate and the probability of the eigenstate is |ψnet|eigenstate|2? If it invalidates the model I'm curious to know what was the false assumption?


Also, the current order of logic is: Measurement in system 1first-order strong summation condition. Is the inverse true? first-order strong summation conditionMeasurement in system 1


Calculations


To make contact with the interacting case we use perturbation theory (assume H12 is small, see detour to justify this assumption):


ˆHnet=ˆHnon-int+ϵˆHint(1,2)


Using perturbation theory (upto first order correction) in the energy eigenstates:



|ψnetn=|ψ(0)non-int+ϵ|ψ(1)non-int=|ψ(0)n+ϵ|ψ(1)n


Where:


|ψ(1)n=knψ(0)k|ˆHint(1,2)|ψ(0)nE(0)nE(0)k|ψ(0)k


Case ˜t:


(When not mentioned the kets are at time ˜t where ˜t=t˜ϵ and ˜t+=t+˜ϵ+)


Let ψnet be in some superposition of energy eigenstates:


|ψnet=ncn|ψnetn


Let, us assume the measurement was done at a time t. Hence,


|ψ1(˜t)=|Em


On the other hand, let system 2 be in some superposition of energy eigenstates:



|ψ2=λcλ|Eλ


Putting things together:


|ψnet(˜t)=ncn|ψnetn(˜t)=ncn(|ψ(0)n(˜t)+ϵ|ψ(1)n(˜t))


However, we know,


|ψ(0)n(˜t)=|Em,Eλn(m,λ)


where n(m,λ) is a function which puts ˜En=Em+Eλ (˜En is the energy of the non-interacting Hamiltonian) in ascending order (ignoring degeneracy). Also, to relate coefficients by the below procedure:


|ψnon-int(˜t)=|ψ1,ψ2=λcλ|Em,Eλ


But we can also throw light on: |ψnetn=|ψ(0)n+ϵ|ψ(1)nλcλ|ψnetλ=|ψnon-int+ϵλcλ|ψ(1)λ


Taking the inner product with |ψnet=ncn|ψnetn=ncn(|ψ(0)n+ϵ|ψ(1)n) and the right side of the above equation:


0=ϵ(ncnψnon-int|ψ(1)n+(λˉcλψ(1)λ|)(ncn|ψ(0)n))+O(ϵ2)



Ignoring ϵ2:


0=ncnψnon-int|ψ(1)n+(λˉcλψ(1)λ|)(ncn|ψ(0)n)


Let us write the above more generally:


0=nψ(0)n| ψnetψnon-int|ψ(1)n+λnψ(0)n| ψnetψnon-int|Em,Eλψ(1)λ|ψ(0)n


Let, the above equation be called the ˜t equation.


Case ˜t+ :


(When not mentioned the kets are at time ˜t+)


After the measurement on system 1:


|ψ1(˜t+)=|pj=kEk|pj|Ek


Let system 2 be in some superposition of eigen-energies:



|ψ2(˜t+)=λdλ|Eλ=λEλ|ψ2|Eλ


Again, to relate coefficients by the below procedure:


|ψnon-int(˜t+)=|ψ1,ψ2=kλEk|pjEλ|ψ2|Ek,Eλ


Following the same route as last time from |ψnetn(˜t+)=|ψ(0)n+ϵ|ψ(1)n:


kλEk|pjEλ|ψ2|ψnetλ=|ψnon-int+ϵkλEk|pjEλ|ψ2|ψ(1)λ


Also:


|ψnet(˜t+)=nψnet-n|ψnet(|ψ(0)n+ϵ|ψ(1)n)


Taking the inner-product of the above 2 equations and focusing on the 1'st order ϵ: 0=nkλpj|Ekψ2|Eλψnet-n|ψnetψ(1)λ|ψ(0)n+nψnet-n|ψnetψnon-int|ψ(1)n


Let, the above equation be called the ˜t+ equation.


Combining the ˜t and ˜t+ Cases:



We also know, that ψnet undergoes unitary evolution:


|ψnet(˜t+)=U(˜t+,˜t)|ψnet(˜t)=eiHnet(˜t+˜t)|ψnet(˜t)


Let us go to the Heisenberg picture (the kets do not depend on time), we do so for a straight forward example (and leave the rest for the reader to work out):


ψnet-n(˜t+)|ψnet(˜t+)=ψnet-n|U(˜t+,t)U(˜t+,t)ˆ1|ψnet=ψnet-n|ψnet


We do this for all the kets (remove the time dependence). Hence, writing the t+ equation minus the t equation:


0=nkλpj|Ekψ2|Eλψnet-n|ψnetψ(1)λ|ψ(0)n+nψnet-n|ψnetψnon-int|ψ(1)nnψ(0)n| ψnetψnon-int|ψ(1)nλnψ(0)n| ψnetψnon-int|Em,Eλψ(1)λ|ψ(0)n


Cancelling the term nψ(0)n| ψnetψnon-int|ψ(1)n:


0=nkλpj|Ekψ2|Eλψnet-n|ψnetψ(1)λ|ψ(0)nλnψ(0)n| ψnetψnon-int|Em,Eλψ(1)λ|ψ(0)n


Note: tracing back the calculations we notice: ψnon-int|Em,Eλ=ψ2,Em|Em,Eλ=ψ2|Eλ. Now taking the summation common:


0=(λnψ(0)n| ψnetψ2|Eλψ(1)λ|ψ(0)n)(kpj|Ek1)



Obviously:


1kpj|Ek


Hence,


0=λnψ(0)n| ψnetψ2|Eλψ(1)λ|ψ(0)n


Re-substituting this in the ˜t equation (without time dependency) we get:


0=nψ(0)n| ψnetψnon-int|ψ(1)n


Let the above equations be known as the "first-order strong summation condition".


Detour about ϵ and ˜ϵ±


I would like to supplement why the perturbation approximation is a good one. Let's say we are in the Heisenberg picture and we want to know the time evolution an operator in system 1. A natural question arises which time evolution to use Hnet or H1?The answer is the time evolution is the same (approximately):


m|ˆO1(t)|n=m|eiH1tˆO1eiH1t|n=m|ei(H1+H2+H12)tˆO1ei(H1+H2+H12)t|n



The above makes sense iff,


k|eiH12t|l1


with tt (the time of the measurement ˜ϵ±0) where |k and |l can be any basis element.




No comments:

Post a Comment

Understanding Stagnation point in pitot fluid

What is stagnation point in fluid mechanics. At the open end of the pitot tube the velocity of the fluid becomes zero.But that should result...