log entry ID: .a.e..... 2024-02-11 23:03:25 EST
This log entry also requires knowledge of basic quantum mechanics. Sorry, not sorry.
There is a concept in English called a bucket list. This is undoubtedly a concept in Finnish too, given the significance of the bucket in Finnish culture, but in English, it means something different. It is a list of all of the things you want to do before you “kick the bucket”, which is another English idiom meaning “die”. My bucket list has exactly one item: I must solve the quantum measurement problem.
This is why I want to complete a Master’s in Theoretical Physics at Helsingin yliopisto. I have already applied, and am awaiting their response. Their response is not set to arrive until April 15, so this is how I am spending the intervening days; writing log entries like this.
My original plan was to move to Finland as a first priority and work on the measurement problem as, more or less, a means of getting to Finland. I have since changed my mind. If I can’t do theoretical physics in Finland, I’ll just look for somewhere else where I can. I won’t be happy about it, but those are my priorities.
My life’s mission is not aided by the fact that the measurement problem itself is not well-defined in the first place. Thus I must limit the scope of my mission. I am not going to try to answer philosophical questions like what does measurement “mean”, or anything like that. Here’s what I want to know.
First, some terms, so that I can refer to specific parts of the problem.
A measurement is defined by a point in time, t_m
, and a countable list of projectors Pi[n]
, with one projector per possible outcome.
The state, psi(t)
, is one way before the measurement, and another way after the measurement:
lim(t_m, NEGATIVE, psi) = psi_before # 0.
psi(t_m) = psi_after # 1.
where lim(t_m, NEGATIVE, psi)
is the limit as t
approaches t_m
from the negative side of psi(t)
.
The transition from psi_before
to psi_after
happens randomly with the following probabilities:
P[n] = hc(psi_before) * Pi[n] * psi_before # 2.
where hc
is the Hermitian conjugate.
Once a particular outcome, n
, is decided, the state transitions according to the formula:
psi_after = normalise(Pi[n] * psi_before) # 3.
where normalise(v) = v/norm(v)
.
psi_after
then forms the initial condition for the continuation of the Schrödinger equation after the measurement. (See equation 1.)
A measurement corresponds to an experimental observation.
n
is the result of this observation.
This is the only information that physicists can recover from the prior quantum state, psi_before
.
It is connected to the value of psi_before
, but only randomly.
It is impossible to fully reconstruct psi_before
from just this measurement.
This is what all physicists agree on.
Well, there is a generalisation of this called weak measurement, but it’s the same basic idea.
Here’s the problem:
what is Pi
, and what is t_m
?
In other words,
What measurements happen and when do they happen?
Ultimately, right now, we don’t know. Quantum mechanics is obviously incomplete. This is unacceptable!
There are makeshift half-answers to this problem that physicists use to get their work done. I mean, of course there are. How else would there have been agreement on what a measurement is, in the first place? There’s a half-answer for spectroscopy; a different half-answer for statistical mechanics; a different half-answer for each and every quantum computer that has been built so far; etc.; but there is no one rule that applies in all circumstances!
This is what I am after.
This is my life’s mission.