1
$\begingroup$

So for two quantum systems a and b in a joint state

$$\Psi = \lvert \psi_a \rangle\lvert \psi_b \rangle \tag{1}$$

With basis states $\{\lvert \phi_k \rangle\}$ for system a and $\{\lvert v_j \rangle\}$ for system b, and operator A acting on the Hilbert space of a with the spectral decomposition

$$ A = \lambda_1\lvert \phi_1 \rangle \langle \phi_1 \rvert + \lambda_2\sum_{n=2}^N \lvert \phi_n \rangle \langle \phi_n \rvert \ \tag{2}$$

I am trying to understand how I can write an expression for the projector acting on the total Hilbert space and which is associated to the measurement outcome $\lambda_2$ so I can then calculate the probability of obtaining $\lambda_2$ in a measurement of A on the state $\Psi$.

My understanding is that only the second term of equation 2 is relevant for this measurement as it contains the coefficient $\lambda_2$. Operator A only acts on the Hilbert space of a, so am I correct in writing that the projector acting on the total Hilbert space is the following? $$ (\lambda_2\sum_{n=2}^N \lvert \phi_n \rangle \langle \phi_n \rvert) \otimes I \tag{3} $$

And if the probability of measuring $\lambda_2$ is the following (because there are multiple projectors corresponding to the measurement $\lambda_2$) $$ \langle \Psi \rvert \ \sum_{n=2}^N \lvert \phi_n \rangle \langle \phi_n \rvert \Psi \rangle \tag{4} $$

If anyone could point out if I'm correct or wrong with my answers/reasoning and why, it would be much appreciated. I also would like to know if I can write my expressions in a simpler way. Finally, I would like to ask that since only the Hilbert space of a is concerned in this measurement, does that mean the basis states for system b is completely irrelevant even if I change them? Thank you.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Yes. You are correct. We can write operator $A$ as $$ A = \left[\lambda_1 |\phi_1 \rangle \langle \phi_1| + \lambda_2\sum |\phi_n\rangle \langle \phi_n| \right] \otimes I_b$$ as it acts as the identity operator on subsystem $b$. Consequently, it doesn't matter what is the basis in which we write subsystem $b$, as the identity operator is the same in every basis ($U I U^{\dagger} = I$). The state of subsystem $b$ will not be changed following the measurement of $A$.

As to your question about writing it more neatly. If (but only if) the sum over $n$ covers all the basis states other than $n=1$ then you can replace it with the projector that completes $|\phi_1\rangle\langle\phi_1|$ as $$ A = \left[\lambda_1 |\phi_1\rangle\langle\phi_1|+\lambda_2\left(I-|\phi_1\rangle\langle\phi_1|\right)\right]\otimes I_b $$

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you! I thought that was the case regarding the basis states of system b but I wasn't sure how to formally argue this. Does this mean with respect to calculating the probability of measuring $\lambda_2$, that equation 4 is correct? $\endgroup$ – s.twenty Nov 5 '19 at 11:36
  • $\begingroup$ @s.twenty yes. eq. 4 gives the probability to measure $\lambda_2$. $\endgroup$ – user245141 Nov 5 '19 at 12:02
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you. Lastly, I would like to ask because the product state is expressed in a separable form, does this mean that systems a and b are not entangled and therefore measurements of a and b are not correlated? $\endgroup$ – s.twenty Nov 5 '19 at 15:17

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.