Origin of Probabilities in Quantum Mechanics?

In summary, the non-normalized wavefunction of a general qubit is given by: the complex amplitudes ##A## and ##B## can be represented by two arrows in the complex plane; multiplying the wavefunction by any complex number ##R## without changing the physics will cause the arrows ##A## and ##B## to rotate and shrink/expand together with a fixed angle between them; two sets of points will be traced out represented by a circle with area ##|A|^2## and a circle with area ##|B|^2##; the probabilities of finding ourselves in set ##A## (measuring ##0##) or set ##B## (measuring ##1##) are given by
  • #1
jcap
170
12
The non-normalized wavefunction of a general qubit is given by:
$$|\psi\rangle=A|0\rangle+B|1\rangle.$$
The complex amplitudes ##A## and ##B## can be represented by two arrows in the complex plane:

complex.jpg


Now the wavefunction can be multiplied by any complex number ##R## without changing the physics. This will cause the arrows ##A## and ##B## to rotate and shrink/expand together with a fixed angle between them.

Therefore two sets of points will be traced out represented by a circle with area ##|A|^2## and a circle with area ##|B|^2##. These represent the sets of possible values for the amplitudes ##A## and ##B##.

Thus if we become entangled with the qubit then the probabilities of finding ourselves in set ##A## (measuring ##0##) or set ##B## (measuring ##1##) are given by:
$$P(0)=\frac{|A|^2}{|A|^2+|B|^2}$$
$$P(1)=\frac{|B|^2}{|A|^2+|B|^2}.$$
Does this picture help to understand the origin of probabilities in quantum mechanics?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hello. I add that after normalization circle A and circle B are transformed within unit circle. Relative angle between A and B matters not their absolute angle to axis because wavefunctions ##\psi## and ##e^{i\alpha}\psi## express the same state.

So we may improve by making :
[tex] A=\cos (\theta/2), B=\sin(\theta/2)[/tex]
where ##0 \leq \theta \leq \pi ##. You see positivity and normalization
[tex]0 \leq A,B \leq 1,\ \ A^2+B^2=1[/tex]
is satisfied in that form. Also take angle of A is zero and angle of B to A is ##\phi##.
[tex]P(0)=\cos^2 (\theta/2),\ \ P(1)=\sin^2 (\theta/2)[/tex]Four parameters A, angle of A, B and angle of B will be reduced to two, ##\theta## and ##\phi##. These two angles ##\theta## and ##\phi## which are interpreted as polar coordinates for unit sphere ##r=1## called Bloch sphere in this context express qubit state.

As for projection of state vector to z axis
Length from |1> pole to the projection
[tex]cos\theta -(-1)= 2P(0)[/tex]
is |0> probability multiplied by 2.
Length from |0> pole to the projection
[tex]1-cos\theta = 2P(1)[/tex]
is |1> probability multiplied by 2.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
jcap said:
Does this picture help to understand the origin of probabilities in quantum mechanics?
I don't think so. You are describing a quantum system, but that do not explain why it has to be that way. I may be misunderstanding your question, though.
 
  • #4
andresB said:
I don't think so. You are describing a quantum system, but that do not explain why it has to be that way. I may be misunderstanding your question, though.

I was wondering if the redundancy in the magnitude and angle of the overall phase factor implies circular areas of amplitudes associated with the vectors ##|0\rangle## and ##|1\rangle##. These areas could provide the "weights" for obtaining the eigenvalues ##0## and ##1##.

As I understand it I can normalize ##|\psi\rangle## by either first choosing an ##A## or first choosing a ##B##. There are a circular area's worth of ##A##s that I can pick or a circular area's worth of ##B##s. These areas give the weights for obtaining eigenvalues ##0## or ##1## respectively. Maybe this argument only works with a discrete grid of amplitude values.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
jcap said:
Does this picture help to understand the origin of probabilities in quantum mechanics?

I don't see how since your picture only gives a way to visualize the numerical values of the probabilities, not why there are probabilities at all in the first place.
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba
  • #6
Correction

Let
$$A=R_Ae^{i\theta_A}$$
$$B=R_Be^{i\theta_B}$$
A general normalized wavefunction is given by:
$$|\psi\rangle=\frac{1}{(R_A^2+R_B^2)^{1/2}}\large[R_Ae^{i\theta_A}+R_Be^{i\theta_B}\large]$$
Assume that I multiply the amplitudes ##A## and ##B## by
$$C=Re^{i\theta}$$
Then the normalized wavefunction becomes
$$|\psi\rangle=\frac{1}{R(R_A^2+R_B^2)^{1/2}}\large[RR_Ae^{i(\theta_A+\theta)}+RR_Be^{i(\theta_B+\theta)}\large]$$
$$|\psi\rangle=\frac{e^{i\theta}}{(R_A^2+R_B^2)^{1/2}}\large[R_Ae^{i\theta_A}+R_Be^{i\theta_B}\large]$$
It seems that the only degree of freedom is a phase angle ##\theta## rather than an area as I asserted above.
 
  • #7
jcap said:
It seems that the only degree of freedom is a phase angle θ rather than an area as I asserted above.

@jcap this ##\theta## has no physical meaning as I said in post #2 so it is convenient to take it as ##-\theta_A## so that phase factor appears only on B.

My post #2 does so, i.e.
[tex]\cos\frac{\theta}{2}|0>+e^{i\phi}sin\frac{\theta}{2}|1>[/tex]
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes mattt
  • #8
  • Like
Likes anuttarasammyak

FAQ: Origin of Probabilities in Quantum Mechanics?

What is the origin of probabilities in quantum mechanics?

The origin of probabilities in quantum mechanics is a fundamental question that has been debated by scientists for decades. The most widely accepted interpretation is the Copenhagen interpretation, which states that probabilities arise from the act of measurement. In other words, the act of observing a quantum system causes it to collapse into a definite state with a certain probability.

How does the uncertainty principle relate to probabilities in quantum mechanics?

The uncertainty principle, first proposed by Werner Heisenberg, states that it is impossible to know both the position and momentum of a particle with absolute certainty. This uncertainty is reflected in the probabilities associated with quantum systems. The more accurately we know the position of a particle, the less certain we are about its momentum, and vice versa.

Are probabilities in quantum mechanics objective or subjective?

This is a highly debated question in the field of quantum mechanics. Some scientists argue that probabilities are objective, meaning they exist independently of our observations. Others argue that they are subjective, meaning they are a result of our limited knowledge and understanding of the quantum world.

Can probabilities in quantum mechanics be predicted?

According to the Copenhagen interpretation, probabilities in quantum mechanics cannot be predicted with certainty. They are inherently random and only become definite when measured. However, other interpretations, such as the Many-Worlds interpretation, propose that all possible outcomes of a measurement actually occur in different parallel universes, and therefore probabilities can be predicted.

How do scientists test and verify the probabilities in quantum mechanics?

Scientists use a variety of experimental techniques to test and verify the probabilities predicted by quantum mechanics. These include double-slit experiments, which demonstrate the wave-particle duality of particles, and Bell tests, which test the principle of quantum entanglement. Additionally, the predictions of quantum mechanics have been consistently confirmed through countless experiments and observations.

Similar threads

Back
Top