Advertisement

Foundations of Physics

, Volume 20, Issue 11, pp 1329–1343 | Cite as

Limitations of the projection postulate

  • L. E. Ballentine
Part II. Invited Papers Dedicated To John Stewart Bell

Abstract

The projection postulate, which prescribes “collapse of the state vector” upon measurement, is not an essential part of quantum mechanics. Rather it is only an optional discarding of certain branches of the state vector that are expected to be irrelevant for the purpose at hand. However, its use is hazardous, and there are examples of repeated measurements for which the conventional application of the projection postulate leads to incorrect results.

Keywords

Repeated Measurement Quantum Mechanic State Vector Incorrect Result Conventional Application 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    J. S. Bell, inThe Ghost in the Atom, P. C. W. Davies and J. R. Brown, eds. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1986), pp. 45–57.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. Pearle,Am. J. Phys. 35, 742 (1967).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    L. E. Ballentine,Rev. Mod. Phys. 42, 358 (1970).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    R. G. Newton,Am. J. Phys. 48, 1029 (1980).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Cini,Nuovo Cimento B 73, 27 (1983).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. B. Griffiths,J. Stat. Phys. 36, 219 (1984).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Peres,Am. J. Phys. 52, 644 (1984).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Peres,Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 480, 438 (1986).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. B. Pippard,Eur. J. Phys. 7, 43 (1986).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    L. E. Ballentine,Quantum Mechanics (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1990).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    D. T. Pegg and P. L. Knight,Phys. Rev. A 37, 4303 (1988).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. Porrati and S. Putterman,Phys. Rev. A 36, 929 (1987).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. Schenzle and R. G. Brewer,Phys. Rev. A 34, 3127 (1986).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    L. E. Ballentine, inFundamental Questions in Quantum Mechanics, L. M. Roth and A. Inomata, eds. (Gordon & Breach, New York, 1986), pp. 65–75.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    L. E. Ballentine,Int. J. Theor. Phys. 27, 211 (1988).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    A. I. Fine,Phys. Rev. D 2, 2783 (1970).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. Shimony,Phys. Rev. D 9, 2321 (1974). (This paper remedies a technical defect in Ref. 12, as well as generalizing the result to approximate measurements.)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    New Techniques and Ideas in Quantum Measurement Theory, D. M. Greenberger, ed. (New York Academy of Science, New York, 1986).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. Hall, C. Kim, B. McElroy, and A. Shimony,Found. Phys. 7, 759 (1977).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    L. E. Ballentine,Am. J. Phys. 54, 883 (1986).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    R. J. Glauber,Phys. Rev. 130, 2529 (1963).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    R. Ghosh and L. Mandel,Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 1903 (1987).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    T. Ohira and P. Pearle,Am. J. Phys. 56, 692 (1988).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    N. F. Mott,Proc. R. Soc. London A 126, 79 (1929); reprinted inQuantum Theory and Measurement, J. A. Wheeler and W. H. Zurek, eds. (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1983).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    L. I. Schiff,Quantum Mechanics, 3rd edn., (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968), p. 335.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    J. S. Bell,Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987). See the essay entitled “Quantum mechanics for cosmologist,” pp. 116–138.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    L. Fonda, G. C. Ghirhardi, and A. Rimini,Rep. Prog. Phys. 41, 587 (1978).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    M. Bunge and A. J. Kalnay,Nuovo Cimento 77, 1 (1983).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    A. Peres,Am. J. Phys. 48, 931 (1980).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    A. Peres,Phys. Rev. D 39, 2943 (1989).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    W. M. Itano, D. J. Heinzen, J. J. Bollinger, and D. J. Wineland,Phys. Rev. A 41, 2295 (1990).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. E. Ballentine
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhysicsSimon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada

Personalised recommendations