Two-photon interferometry illuminates quantum measurements

The quantum measurement problem still finds no consensus. Nonlocal interferometry provides an unprecedented experimental probe by entangling two photons in the "measurement state" (MS). The experiments show that each photon "measures" the other; the resulting entanglement decoheres both photons; decoherence collapses both photons to unpredictable but definite outcomes; and the two-photon MS continues evolving coherently. Thus, contrary to common opinion, when a two-part system is in the MS, the outcomes actually observed at both subsystems are definite. Although standard quantum physics postulates definite outcomes, two-photon interferometry verifies them to be not only consistent with, but actually a prediction of, the other principles. Nonlocality is the key to understanding this. As a consequence of nonlocality, the states we actually observe are the local states. These actually-observed local states collapse, while the global MS, which can be "observed" only after the fact by collecting coincidence data from both subsystems, continues its unitary evolution. This conclusion implies a refined understanding of the eigenstate principle: Following a measurement, the actually-observed local state instantly jumps into the observed eigenstate. Various experts' objections are rebutted.Comment: 1 figure. arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1206.518

Solution of the problem of definite outcomes of quantum measurements

Theory and experiment both demonstrate that an entangled quantum state of two subsystems is neither a superposition of states of its subsystems nor a superposition of composite states but rather a coherent superposition of nonlocal correlations between incoherently mixed local states of the two subsystems. Thus, even if one subsystem happens to be macroscopic as in the entangled "Schrodinger's cat" state resulting from an ideal measurement, this state is not the paradoxical macroscopic superposition it is generally presumed to be. It is, instead, a "macroscopic correlation," a coherent quantum correlation in which one of the two correlated sub-systems happens to be macroscopic. This clarifies the physical meaning of entanglement: When a superposed quantum system A is unitarily entangled with a second quantum system B, the coherence of the original superposition of different states of A is transferred to different correlations between states of A and B, so the entangled state becomes a superposition of correlations rather than a superposition of states. This transfer preserves unitary evolution while permitting B to be macroscopic without entailing a macroscopic superposition. This resolves the "problem of outcomes" but is not a complete resolution of the measurement problem because the entangled state is still reversible.Comment: 21 pages, 3 figures, 1 tabl

Resolving the problem of definite outcomes of measurements

The heart of the measurement puzzle, namely the problem of definite outcomes, remains unresolved. This paper shows that Josef Jauch's 1968 reduced density operator approach is the solution, even though many question it: The entangled "Measurement State" implies local mixtures of definite but indeterminate eigenvalues even though the MS continues evolving unitarily. A second, independent, argument based on the quantum's nonlocal entanglement with its measuring apparatus shows that the outcomes must be definite eigenvalues because of relativity's ban on instant signaling. Experiments with entangled photon pairs show the MS to be a non-paradoxical superposition of correlations between states rather than a "Schrodinger's cat" superposition of states. Nature's measurement strategy is to shift the superposition--the coherence--from the detected quantum to the correlations between the quantum and its detector, allowing both subsystems to collapse locally to mixtures of definite eigenvalues. This solution implies an innocuous revision of the standard eigenvalue-eigenstate link. Three frequent objections to this solution are rebutted.Comment: 16 pages, 2 figure

Avalanche photodiodes and vacuum phototriodes for the electromagnetic calorimeter of the CMS experiment at the large hadron collider

The homogeneous lead tungstate electromagnetic calorimeter for the Compact Muon Solenoid detector at the Large Hadron Collider operates in a challenging radiation environment. The central region of the calorimeter uses large-area avalanche photodiodes to detect the fast blue-violet scintillation light from the crystals. The high hadron fluence in the forward region precludes the use of these photodiodes and vacuum phototriodes are used in this region. The constructional complexity of the calorimeter, which comprises 75848 individual crystals, plus the activation of material make repair during the lifetime of the detector virtually impossible. We describe here the key features and performance of the photodetectors and the quality assurance procedures that were used to ensure that the proportion of photodetectors that fail over the lifetime of CMS will be limited to a fraction of a percent

Re-assessment of the state of Schroedinger's cat, final version

The quantum state of Schroedinger's cat is usually incorrectly described as a superposition of "dead" and "alive," despite an argument by Rinner and Werner that, locally, the cat should be considered to be in a mixture of non-superposed states. Here, it is rigorously proven that the cat is not in a superposition. This is central to the measurement problem. Nonlocal two-photon interferometry experiments throw further light on the measurement state by probing the effect of a variable phase factor inserted between its superposed terms. These experiments demonstrate that both subsystems really are in locally mixed states rather than superpositions, and they tell us what the measurement state superposition actually superposes. They show that measurement transfers the coherence in Schroedinger's nuclear superposition neither to the cat nor to the nucleus, but only to the correlations between them. This explains the collapse process--but not its subsequent irreversible dissipation--within the context of unitary dynamics with no need for external entities such as the environment, a human mind, other worlds, or collapse mechanisms.Comment: 11 page