0
$\begingroup$

We know that the post measurement states after a projective measurement has the form

$$\frac{\hat{\Pi}|\Psi(t)\rangle}{\sqrt{\langle\psi(t)|\hat{\Pi}|\psi(t)\rangle}} \qquad (1) $$

When a position measurement is made, with finite accuracy $\delta$, we can define $\hat{\Pi}_{x_i}= \int_{x_i }^{x_i+\delta}{|x\rangle\langle x|dx}$ as the projectors.

Why can't we define $\hat{\Pi}_x=|x\rangle\langle x|$ as the projectors instead,assuming that there is no theoretical limit to the precision? That is, I have come across statements saying that

$$\frac{|x\rangle \langle x|\Psi(t)\rangle}{\sqrt{\langle\psi(t)|\hat{\Pi}|\psi(t)\rangle}} \qquad (2)$$

is not a valid post measurement state for position measurements. Why is that so? I have heard that it is related to the fact that for position states $|x\rangle$, we have $\int_{-\infty }^{\infty}\langle x'|x\rangle\langle x|x'\rangle dx'=\infty$, i.e unnormalizable. Although I might be missing something basic, I am not able to see why this fact prohibits equation (2) as a post measurement state?

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ On what hilbert space do your proposed projectors act? $\endgroup$
    – WillO
    May 23 '20 at 21:59
  • $\begingroup$ @WillO, on the infinite dimensional Hilbert representing the system under consideration? $\endgroup$ May 23 '20 at 22:05
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Hi Varun, I've edited your question to make the MathJax a bit more readable, and I added subscripts to your projectors. Feel free to revert the edits if you would like. $\endgroup$
    – J. Murray
    May 23 '20 at 22:24
  • $\begingroup$ Varun: And what Hilbert space would that be, exactly? $\endgroup$
    – WillO
    May 23 '20 at 22:59
3
$\begingroup$

The simple answer is that your proposed projector takes you out of the Hilbert space $\mathcal H$, because the norm of the state (2) is found to be $\langle x | x\rangle = \delta(0) \rightarrow \infty$.

"Non-normalizable states" are useful devices from a computational standpoint, but they are purely mathematical tools; they do not lie in $\mathcal H$, and do not correspond to physical states in which the system can exist. A genuine physical state can only be a continuous superposition of position eigenstates, i.e. $|\psi\rangle = \int f(x) |x\rangle\ dx$ for some function $f\in L^2(\mathbb R)$.

Put differently, the position eigenstates are formal devices which only make real sense when they appear in an integral like the one above. Bare position eigenstates $|x\rangle$ must be used with care, and with the understanding that there is an implicit integral around whatever expression you find them in.

$\endgroup$

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.