Forum for Science, Industry and Business

Sponsored by:     3M 
Search our Site:

 

Are Weak Values Quantum? Don't Bet On It

25.09.2014

New work asserts that a key technique used to probe quantum systems may not be so quantum after all, according to Perimeter postdoctoral researcher Joshua Combes and his colleague Christopher Ferrie.

Over the past 20 years, a strange idea called a “weak value” has taken root in quantum information science.


How the result of a coin toss can be 100 heads: First, you preselect on heads. Then, a friend performs a weak measurement and occasionally flips the coin. When the coin comes back tails, then you calculate (using the mathematical steps in Ferrie and Combes’ paper) what your friend measured. The calculation says they measured not just heads, but 100 heads!

Many of the things you can do with quantum technologies entail being able to gain information from quantum systems. But there is a quantum conundrum: we can’t say what a particle is doing when we’re not looking at it, but when we do look at it, we change its behaviour.

But what if we could look “a little”? Well, that’s a weak measurement, a concept which is central to the notion of a weak value. The basic idea of weak measurement is to gain a little bit of information about a quantum system by only disturbing it a little bit; by doing this many times, one can ultimately gain quite a bit of information about the system. Weak measurements have applications in quantum information technologies such as quantum feedback control and quantum communications.

Obtaining a weak value involves taking a weak measurement of a particle. It also – counterintuitively – depends on throwing out the majority of the results, carefully selecting only a few to keep in an effort to screen out particles which were knocked off-course by the act of measurement.

In this way, researchers believe they can gradually build up a picture of the typical behaviour of particles even between measurements. When these carefully gathered and screened measurements produce something unexpected and (apparently) quantum, that’s called a weak value. Weak values are a whole new window into the quantum world.

Unless, of course, they’re not. What if weak values aren’t quantum at all?

“We’re skeptical of the whole field,” says Joshua Combes. Combes is a postdoctoral fellow at Perimeter and the University of Waterloo’s Institute for Quantum Computing (IQC), and he has just published a Physical Review Letters paper critical of weak measurement.

“On the one hand, the quantum world can be weird, of course,” he says. “But on the other hand, we need to work carefully to distinguish between genuinely quantum effects and effects that can be replicated classically.”

In the new paper, Combes worked with Christopher Ferrie of the University of New Mexico on just such a problem: finding a classical analogue of a weak value presented in the field’s seminal paper.

In the original paper, Yakir Aharonov (now a Distinguished Visiting Research Chair at Perimeter), David Albert, and Lev Vaidman laid down the principles of weak measurement, arguing for the power of extracting only a “little bit” of information from each measurement, and for throwing most of that away. Their procedure went something like this.

Say you want to measure the spin of some particles. You would prepare particles in some particular state, say “spin up,” throwing away the data from particles that are “spin down.” This is called “pre-selection.” Later, you would detect the particles in a final state, again throwing away those that aren’t in a desired state. This is called “post-selection.”

You also make a measurement in between, but in the quantum world, any measurement has the potential to disrupt the system. Aharonov et al. argued that you should measure the spin as gently – as weakly – as possible. This measurement is by nature imprecise, so you must then average over a large number of trials.

By cleverly combining pre-selection, post-selection, and weak measurement, Aharonov and colleagues invented a new and apparently fundamentally quantum way of measuring quantum properties. Their landmark 1988 paper is called, “How the measurement of a component of the spin of a spin-½ particle can turn out to be 100.” The weak value is the spin quantity that is equal to 100.

A particle whose spin should be either +½  or -½  having a spin of 100? Combes and Ferrie wouldn’t put money on that.

Facing the field’s giants head on, they outline a parallel process – the same pre-selection, post-selection, and weak measurement – to show that you can get the same odd result out of the world’s simplest random system: a coin flip. As a poke in the eye, they call their paper: “How the result of a single coin toss can turn out to be 100 heads.”

Combes demonstrates. He has you flip coins, then hand him only the coins that come up heads, without telling him what you got. (That’s pre-selection.) He glances at each coin too quickly to be entirely sure what it says. (That’s weak measurement.) Some percentage of the time, he gives each coin a nudge, which might occasionally flip it. (Even a weak measurement can sometimes disturb a quantum system, and the nudge imitates that.) Finally, he hands it back to you. If it’s heads, the trial is discarded (that’s the post-selection step); if it comes back tails, he asks you to predict what he measured.

It seems straightforward when the coin is in front of you: if it’s tails, you would intuitively predict he probably saw heads (since you only handed him coins that came up heads). In the paper, Ferrie and Combes outline the mathematics of your prediction step-by-step using the same sequence of operations that resulted in Aharonov et al.’s weak value. The bizarre result? If the coin comes back to you showing tails, after performing the same math, you too would predict that he measured it as reading 100 heads.

The quantum calculations performed by Aharonov et al. to get that strange 100 result are highly technical; what’s important, say Combes and Ferrie, is that when the same calculations are done classically, they give the same bizarre result.

“If you don’t find that convincing, then why would you find the quantum equivalent of that convincing?” asks Combes.

Quantum effects can sometimes be strange. But, as the authors write, “Where a classical explanation exists, no quantum explanation is required. This is the guiding principle of quantum foundations research.”

The authors believe that anomalous values found via weak measurement are not a truly quantum effect, but an artifact of classical statistics and classical disturbances. As any fan of mathematical puzzles could tell you, problems based on who knows what and when can produce surprising results. The Monty Hall problem is the most famous example, and it tricks game show contestants and mathematics professors alike.

“Statistics can fool you,” says Combes. “We think this particular weak value puzzle is a statistical question, not a fundamentally quantum question. There might be something genuinely quantum about weak values, but to my eye that’s not clear yet.”

Reflecting on the central paradox of weak values – that by measuring things somewhat precisely, we can build up a better picture of the quantum world – Combes gets philosophical.

“Don’t get me wrong: mystery is great,” he says. “I want there to be mystery – that’s why I’m in this field. But shouldn’t we be trying to get to the bottom of things, rather than making them more mysterious than they really are? I think we need to carefully question what weak values really tell us. Chris and I are hoping this paper will spark some of that questioning.”

That, at least, seems like a very good bet. – Erin Bow

Eamon O'Flynn | Eurek Alert!
Further information:
http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/news/are-weak-values-quantum-dont-bet-it

More articles from Physics and Astronomy:

nachricht What happens when we heat the atomic lattice of a magnet all of a sudden?
18.07.2018 | Forschungsverbund Berlin

nachricht Subaru Telescope helps pinpoint origin of ultra-high energy neutrino
16.07.2018 | National Institutes of Natural Sciences

All articles from Physics and Astronomy >>>

The most recent press releases about innovation >>>

Die letzten 5 Focus-News des innovations-reports im Überblick:

Im Focus: First evidence on the source of extragalactic particles

For the first time ever, scientists have determined the cosmic origin of highest-energy neutrinos. A research group led by IceCube scientist Elisa Resconi, spokesperson of the Collaborative Research Center SFB1258 at the Technical University of Munich (TUM), provides an important piece of evidence that the particles detected by the IceCube neutrino telescope at the South Pole originate from a galaxy four billion light-years away from Earth.

To rule out other origins with certainty, the team led by neutrino physicist Elisa Resconi from the Technical University of Munich and multi-wavelength...

Im Focus: Magnetic vortices: Two independent magnetic skyrmion phases discovered in a single material

For the first time a team of researchers have discovered two different phases of magnetic skyrmions in a single material. Physicists of the Technical Universities of Munich and Dresden and the University of Cologne can now better study and understand the properties of these magnetic structures, which are important for both basic research and applications.

Whirlpools are an everyday experience in a bath tub: When the water is drained a circular vortex is formed. Typically, such whirls are rather stable. Similar...

Im Focus: Breaking the bond: To take part or not?

Physicists working with Roland Wester at the University of Innsbruck have investigated if and how chemical reactions can be influenced by targeted vibrational excitation of the reactants. They were able to demonstrate that excitation with a laser beam does not affect the efficiency of a chemical exchange reaction and that the excited molecular group acts only as a spectator in the reaction.

A frequently used reaction in organic chemistry is nucleophilic substitution. It plays, for example, an important role in in the synthesis of new chemical...

Im Focus: New 2D Spectroscopy Methods

Optical spectroscopy allows investigating the energy structure and dynamic properties of complex quantum systems. Researchers from the University of Würzburg present two new approaches of coherent two-dimensional spectroscopy.

"Put an excitation into the system and observe how it evolves." According to physicist Professor Tobias Brixner, this is the credo of optical spectroscopy....

Im Focus: Chemical reactions in the light of ultrashort X-ray pulses from free-electron lasers

Ultra-short, high-intensity X-ray flashes open the door to the foundations of chemical reactions. Free-electron lasers generate these kinds of pulses, but there is a catch: the pulses vary in duration and energy. An international research team has now presented a solution: Using a ring of 16 detectors and a circularly polarized laser beam, they can determine both factors with attosecond accuracy.

Free-electron lasers (FELs) generate extremely short and intense X-ray flashes. Researchers can use these flashes to resolve structures with diameters on the...

All Focus news of the innovation-report >>>

Anzeige

Anzeige

VideoLinks
Industry & Economy
Event News

Leading experts in Diabetes, Metabolism and Biomedical Engineering discuss Precision Medicine

13.07.2018 | Event News

Conference on Laser Polishing – LaP: Fine Tuning for Surfaces

12.07.2018 | Event News

11th European Wood-based Panel Symposium 2018: Meeting point for the wood-based materials industry

03.07.2018 | Event News

 
Latest News

Global study of world's beaches shows threat to protected areas

19.07.2018 | Earth Sciences

New creepy, crawly search and rescue robot developed at Ben-Gurion U

19.07.2018 | Power and Electrical Engineering

Metal too 'gummy' to cut? Draw on it with a Sharpie or glue stick, science says

19.07.2018 | Materials Sciences

VideoLinks
Science & Research
Overview of more VideoLinks >>>