1: \chapter{Conclusion and Open Questions}
2:
3: The model presented in this dissertation may be regarded as a modest step in a more ambitious program suggested
4: by the Two-Vector Formulation, namely, the construction of a general theory of measurement in quantum
5: mechanics based entirely on time-symmetric ensembles and weak values. It may be worthwhile then to give a brief
6: account of what has been achieved here as well as to point out several questions that remain open for future
7: exploration in this direction.
8:
9: As a preliminary motivation for the non-linear model, we have suggested a sort of complementarity between two
10: ``ideal" measurement situations, the standard or strong measurement scheme and the weak measurement scheme, each
11: of which corresponds to the initial conditions of the measuring apparatus being controlled for either optimal
12: precision or conversely, for minimal disturbance of the measured system. A clear distinction between the two
13: extremes becomes evident when the statistics are analyzed against fixed initial and final conditions on the
14: system: in one extreme, the statistics exhibit a spectral distribution for the measured observable, whereas in
15: the other the apparatus appears to show a response to a definite weak value. By identifying these two extremes,
16: the intermediate ``limbo" region of non-ideal measurements becomes of considerable interest as one may expect
17: that the transition form one description to the other is accompanied by a qualitative change in the physics of
18: the measurement interaction.
19:
20: As a way of bridging the two descriptions, we have suggested with the non-linear model an alternative picture
21: based on weak values for general non-ideal von Neumann-type measurements. In this description, the apparatus is
22: seen as driving the system, via-back reaction, into various ``configurations"--i.e., pairs of initial and final
23: states, parameterized by what we have termed the reaction variable of the apparatus. Each configuration
24: determines a local weak value for the measured observable as well as a weight factor, the likelihood factor. The
25: non-linear model may thus be viewed as the ``quantized" version of a picture which in fact proves to have a
26: direct classical correspondence: the possible configurations of the system are ``sampled" with a probability
27: distribution for the reaction variable determined by the likelihood factor, and from each configuration the
28: pointer variable receives a corresponding ``kick" proportional to the local weak value. While direct
29: quantitative agreement with the classical picture of statistical sampling is attained only in the expectation
30: value of the pointer variable, the picture of sampling nevertheless proves useful in analyzing the response of
31: the apparatus at the level of wave functions, where the resulting quantum state of the apparatus can be
32: decomposed as a superposition of weak measurements. The non-linear model therefore provides a complement to the
33: more standard analysis based on the spectral decomposition of the measured observable.
34:
35: The underlying motivation for this dual description is, as mentioned in the introduction, to gain a further
36: understanding of the physics of the measurement interaction. The ``phase-transition" at the end of Chapter $6$
37: gives a particularly good example of a situation in which one may benefit from this dual description, as it is
38: from the point of view of the reaction variable where one sees a qualitative change in the
39: physics of the interaction as one crosses from the weak to strong regimes at a definite critical measurement
40: strength. Such transitions should in fact be quite generic as one only needs to identify situations where the
41: likelihood factor exhibits a drastic ``dip" such as for instance around regions of anomalous superoscillatory
42: behavior. It should be interesting therefore to characterize the degree of universality in these transitions.
43:
44:
45: It would also be desirable to further explore how the standard ideal measurement scheme relates to the picture
46: of sampling weak values. In Chapter $3$ and the ``phase-transition" example in Chapter $6$ we have already given
47: two examples where the emergence of a quantized structure in the resulting distribution of the data is viewed,
48: from the sampling picture, as an interference phenomenon in the quantum-mechanical response of the apparatus to
49: a non-linear effective action. From the point of view of the non-linear model therefore, quantization appears
50: to be more of an emergent property of the whole measurement interaction as opposed to an intrinsic property
51: of the system in isolation.
52:
53: It may then be worthwhile to pursue this idea further in systems, such as a spin-$1/2$, considered to be
54: ``intrinsically" quantized. In particular, we recall how in the case of orbital angular momentum described in
55: Chapter $3$, a local sampling of the weak value reveals the classical angular momentum, whereas integer value
56: quantization emerges only from a global sampling in a manner akin to the appearance of band-structures under
57: periodic potentials. Could it then not be the case that in a similar fashion, underlying the two ``bands" in a
58: Stern-Gerlach measurement of Spin-$1/2$ is in fact a continuous angular momentum vector, such as for instance
59: the one defined by the weak values of the three spin components (Fig. \ref{weakvalspin})? The non-linear model
60: already suggests how this apparently contradictory picture can be reconciled with quantization: the quantized
61: structure of the apparatus wave function coming from the periodicity in the sampling in addition to a likelihood
62: factor which effectively suppresses unusually high values of angular momentum outside of the usual range
63: $[-1/2,1/2]$. The idea is certainly interesting and novel enough to warrant further investigation.
64:
65: In this respect, another aspect worth exploring is the ``configuration" space of the system that is sampled in
66: the measurement process according to the Two-Vector description. In the original formulation
67: \cite{AV90,AV91,AR95}, both the real and imaginary parts of the complex weak value are viewed as being equally
68: fundamental elements of the physical property associated with the measured observable. To specify univocally the
69: complex weak values for all elements of the observable algebra, one therefore needs to assign an {\em ordered}
70: pair of state vectors, as the imaginary part of $\frac{\langle\psi_2|\hat{A}|\psi_1 \rangle}{\langle \psi_2|\psi_1
71: \rangle}$ is odd under a time reversal of the boundary conditions. In the present dissertation, however, we have
72: shown that it is only the real part of the weak value which has a straightforward interpretation in terms of
73: mechanical effects as it can be related directly to a unitary transformation. Furthermore, we have traded the
74: local description provided by the imaginary part for the more natural global description in terms of probability
75: re-assessment provided by the likelihood factor. It is therefore tempting to consider a point in the
76: ``configuration" space as being defined in terms of a minimal object from which both the likelihood factor and
77: the real weak values can be obtained. A candidate for this object is for instance the hermitian operator
78: \begin{equation}
79: \hat{\Omega} \equiv \frac{1}{2} \left[ \frac{ |\psi_1 \rangle \langle \psi_2 | }{ \langle \psi_2 | \psi_1
80: \rangle} + \frac{ |\psi_2 \rangle \langle \psi_1 | }{\langle \psi_1 | \psi_2 \rangle}\right] \, ,
81: \end{equation}
82: in terms of which, the weak value of a given observable $\hat{A}$ is
83: $
84: \alpha ={\rm Tr} [ \hat{A} \hat{\Omega} ] \,
85: $
86: and the weight factor $|\langle \psi_2 | \psi_1 \rangle|^2$ associated with a given pair of vectors is
87: $
88: (2 {\rm Tr} [ \hat{\Omega}^2 ] -1 )^{-1} \, .
89: $
90: Besides the obvious time reversal symmetry $|\psi_1 \rangle \leftrightarrow |\psi_2 \rangle$, a given
91: $\hat{\Omega}$ defines a whole equivalence class of pairs connected by a non-trivial continuous $U(1) \times
92: U(1)$ transformation. It may therefore be worthwhile to investigate the significance of this degeneracy as well
93: as the geometry of the configuration space defined by such objects.
94:
95: Another related point that needs to be pursued with greater care has to do with the single measurement event. So
96: far, we have tried to establish a connection between the overall statistical distribution of the pointer
97: variable and an underlying distribution of sampled weak values. Suppose however we are dealing with a single
98: reading of the pointer variable. What can we then infer about the weak values? This seems to be a rather subtle
99: question as the weak value distribution and the pointer distribution are ultimately related in the same way
100: that that the probability distributions for two canonically conjugate variables are related, that is, at the
101: level of wave functions through a Fourier transform. The idea of applying Bayes' theorem to obtain a posterior
102: distribution of weak values is therefore hindered to the same extent that we cannot obtain a positive-definite
103: joint probability distribution for two canonically conjugate variables.
104:
105: A way of working around this situation may be to trace the weak value in question but now on the
106: system-apparatus composite, as the apparatus reading completes the necessary information for a two-vector
107: description of the composite system. This however brings additional difficulties. Intuitively, one should expect
108: that if the measurement interaction is sufficiently weak, the information provided by a single reading should
109: not significantly modify the free history of weak values of the system. On the other hand, one need not expect
110: this to be the case when dealing with strong measurements as a single reading already entails a re-assessment
111: of the two-vector pair of the same extent to which in the standard formulation it entails a ``collapse" of the
112: wave function. Such problems demand a more careful examination and may be indicative of the type of
113: difficulties that lie ahead in attempting a more rigorous ontological interpretation of the measuring process in
114: terms of weak values.
115: