Illustrated Physics
physics, drawn
Series

Measurement — the series

7 essays on one idea, from the one that introduces it to the one that assumes the rest.
  1. A beam through a chain of analysers. An unpolarised beam of intensity 1 entering 3 analysers oriented at 0°, 90°, 0°, selecting the + then + output each time. The intensities are 0.500 and 0.500 out of analyser 1; 0.250 and 0.250 out of analyser 2; 0.125 and 0.125 out of analyser 3. The last analyser is oriented the same way as the first, and it produces a "−" beam of 0.125 — a beam of exactly the kind the first analyser removed entirely. The middle analyser did not filter the beam; it replaced what the beam had an answer to.

    The answer that was not there before

    Send a beam through an analyser and it splits in two. Send one half through a second analyser turned sideways, then through a third pointing the way the first did, and the property the first analyser removed has come back.

    part 1 · quantum
  2. A quarter of the time, an object is found without being touched. The outcomes of sending one photon into a balanced interferometer, with and without an opaque object in one arm, computed from the same amplitudes. With the arm clear, every photon leaves by the bright port and the dark port receives nothing. With the object in place, 50 per cent of photons are absorbed by it, 25 per cent reach the bright port and say nothing, and 25 per cent reach the dark port — which is impossible unless something is in the arm, and which happens with the object still sitting there unabsorbed and unlit. The photon that produced that click did not go through the blocked arm, because a photon that goes through a blocked arm is absorbed. So an object has been located by light that never met it. The price is that 50 per cent of attempts destroy the thing being looked for: an efficiency of 33 per cent, which the Zeno version of the apparatus takes as close to one as one likes.

    The measurement that never touched it

    A balanced interferometer sends every photon to one output and none at all to the other. Put an object in one arm and the empty port starts clicking — and a click there is caused by a photon that cannot have gone near the object, because a photon that goes near it is absorbed. The object has been found by light that never met it.

    part 2 · quantum
  3. What is lost is exactly what is recorded. Fringe visibility against the distinguishability of the record left in the environment, for six couplings between the interferometer and a marker. The points lie on the quarter circle V² + D² = 1, computed here to a part in 10¹² — the visibility from the output probabilities with the marker traced out, and the distinguishability from the overlap of the marker's two states, with nothing shared between the two calculations. The relation is the quantitative form of complementarity, and it is stronger than the usual statement: interference is not lost because something was disturbed, and not lost only when a measurement is made. It is lost exactly to the extent that the environment could in principle say which way the particle went, whether or not anybody looks at the environment. That is why decoherence is a matter of correlation rather than of disturbance: the coherence has not been destroyed but relocated, into a correlation between the particle and something else.

    Where the interference goes

    A superposition does not stop being a superposition when something interacts with it. What happens is that the coherence moves — out of the system and into a correlation between the system and its surroundings — and the interference disappears from any measurement made on the system alone. For a dust grain in air the move takes 10⁻²⁸ seconds, which is why nothing large has ever been seen in two places.

    part 3 · quantum
  4. Three copiers, and what each of them costs. How well three copying machines reproduce a qubit, against the state's angle from the pole. The first is a linear machine built to copy the two pole states perfectly; linearity then fixes what it does everywhere else, and on an equal superposition it produces an entangled pair whose overlap with the two copies wanted is exactly 0.500. That is the no-cloning theorem written as a number rather than as an argument: no adjustment is available, because the machine's behaviour on superpositions was decided the moment its behaviour on the basis was. The second measures in a fixed basis and prepares two copies of what it found, which is perfect at the poles and averages 0.6667 over the sphere — two thirds, exactly. The third is the best machine there is, and it manages 0.8333 on every state alike: five sixths, and not one.

    The state that cannot be copied

    Every measurement in this collection disturbs what it measures, and the obvious way round that is to make a spare first. It cannot be done, and the reason is not a practical difficulty or a limit on how good an apparatus can be: a copier is a linear machine, so fixing what it does to two states fixes what it does to their superpositions, and what it then does is not a copy.

    part 4 · quantum
  5. A pointer that ends up where no eigenvalue could put it. The distribution of a measuring pointer's position, in units of its own initial spread, after it has been coupled to a spin whose two values would move it by ±g. Strongly coupled, g = 3, the pointer splits into two separate spots at ±3: an ordinary measurement. Weakly coupled, g = 0.1, the two possible shifts overlap almost entirely and the pointer's centre moves by only 0.020, the average of the spin times g. Keeping only the 0.99 per cent of runs in which the spin is afterwards found pointing along x, the kept pointer is centred at 0.802 — 8.0 times g, far outside the range ±g that either value of the spin could produce, and approaching the weak value 10, which it would reach exactly for a still weaker coupling.

    The value a gentle measurement returns

    Couple a pointer to a spin so weakly that the pointer's shift is far smaller than its own blur, and a single run learns almost nothing about the spin. Now keep only the runs in which the spin is later found in a chosen, nearly opposite state. The kept pointers move as though the spin's value were ten, or a hundred, though it can only be plus or minus one. That weak value was predicted in 1988 and has been measured many times. It is not a hidden value of the spin, and it does not break the uncertainty principle: it is paid for exactly in discarded runs. What it does give is a way to watch a quantum system without disturbing it.

    part 5 · quantum
  6. Ramsey fringes: two short pulses and a long wait. The fraction of atoms found in the upper state against the detuning of the drive from the atoms' frequency, in cycles per pulse length, for two π/2 pulses of length τ separated by a free time T = 10τ (solid), computed from the exact two-level evolution. Fringes of period 1/T ride under an envelope set by the short pulses (dotted, the response to one pulse of length 2τ). The central fringe is 0.0444 cycles per τ wide at half height, close to 1/2T. A single long pulse covering the same total time, 12τ (dashed), gives a peak 0.0666 wide: 1.50 times wider, and with no way of telling a large detuning from a small one by its side fringes alone.

    The wait that sets the precision

    To measure an atom's frequency, the obvious method is to drive it and look for the response, and the sharpness of the answer is set by how long the drive lasts. Norman Ramsey found in 1949 that most of the drive is wasted. Two short pulses with a long wait between them do better than one long pulse, because during the wait the atom keeps its own time undisturbed, and any difference from the drive's time piles up as an angle the second pulse can read. Every primary clock in the world runs on that idea, and its precision is set by two numbers: how long the atoms can be left alone, and how many of them there are.

    part 6 · quantum
  7. A round uncertainty sheared into a thin one. The uncertainty in the direction of 100 atoms' combined spin, seen along the spin, drawn out to one standard deviation in each direction. Left: the atoms each in an independent superposition — a disk of variance N/4 = 25 in every transverse direction, so a rotation shows only once it moves the spin by √N/2 = 5.0 units. Right: after one-axis twisting, which turns the spin about the vertical axis at a rate proportional to its height, so that the upper half of the disk is pushed one way and the lower half the other (arrows). The disk becomes an ellipse with variances 1.22 and 535, its long axis tilted 12.2° from the horizontal. Its narrow direction, turned to lie along the rotation to be measured, is 12.0 dB quieter than the disk, allowing for the 11.8% the twisting costs in the length of the spin.

    The atoms that measure better together

    A clock read with a hundred independent atoms locates its phase no better than the scatter of a hundred coin tosses allows, because each atom answers the final question by itself. Let the atoms interact for a moment before they are read and that scatter can be shaped: the round uncertainty of their combined spin is sheared into a thin ellipse, and a phase error invisible against the coin-toss noise becomes four standard deviations wide. The gain grows with the number of atoms, and it is real only if the detector can count atoms nearly one by one.

    part 7 · quantum

All series