Standard quantum measurement model

This chapter is organized as follows In Section 2, quantum states are briefly described. Section 3 presents aspects of standard quantum measurement model. Section 4 includes double-slit, Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen, and Tonomura s experiments. Section 5 illustrates calculations of quantum states for quantum measurements. In Section 6, atom interferometer experiment of Scully et al. is analyzed. A detailed discussion is presented in Section 7, emphasizing a physical perception of quantum mechanics. 

Once the preferred conformation of each term of the series has been settled, the basicity (and acidity) scales provided by CNDO calculations on the assumption of standard geometrical models are identical to those obtained from i.c.r. and u.p.s.. Quantum calculations even allowed us to predict the basicity of some Lewis bases which could not be experimentally determined because of side-reactions occurring during the measurements. 

The virial isotherm equation, which can represent experimental isotherm contours well, gives Henry s law at low pressures and provides a basis for obtaining the fundamental constants of sorption equilibria. A further step is to employ statistical and quantum mechanical procedures to calculate equilibrium constants and standard energies and entropies for comparison with those measured. In this direction moderate success has already been achieved in other systems, such as the gas hydrates 25, 26) and several gas-zeolite systems 14, 17, 18, 27). In the present work AS6 for krypton has been interpreted in terms of statistical thermodynamic models. 

From this viewpoint we must expect that all measurements of a, whether they are based on atomic physics, nuclear physics, or condensed matter physics, must agree with a obtained from QED (or more precisely the Standard Model) when their precisions are improved to 10-9, comparable to that of a(ae). If serious disagreement develops as precision of measurement improves, it might indicate a serious fault in some of these theories, possibly including quantum mechanics itself. See [12] for further discussions. 

Registering on a screen, an individual spot, as seen in Scully et al. model, epitomizes (in the standard approach) an individual measurement (Cf. Ref [11]). If one focuses only on the spots, individual results then look purely random without any possibility of detailed causal explanation [17]. From the perspective developed here, the spots will pattern the quantum state one sets up to measure. Energy in the form of quanta is required to imprint the measuring device. The result is an ordered picture of a quantum state emerging from the spots aggregate in laboratory (real) space. The event also includes information on the probing apparatus with associated noise. 

Spectroscopic Measurements. Absorption spectra were obtained using a Perkin-Elmer Model 554 Spectrophotometer and phosphorescence spectra and mean lifetimes were obtained at 77 K using a Perkin-Elmer LS-5 Luminescence Spectrometer coupled to a 3600 data station. Phosphorescence quantum yields were obtained by the relative method using benzophenone (0p = 0.74 in ethanol glass at 77 K) as a standard (11). 

The scenario, at first glance, seems to escape the standard experimental approach, namely comparison of the outcome from a set of observations with predictions based on a fittable model The control of all degrees of freedom of a quantum object is hard to achieve. Moreover, any measurement requires the interaction of quantum object and classical meter, and the object is supposed to suffer intolerable back action. However, there is a loophole based on "indirect null-result" measurements [10]. Fortunately enough, there are predictions, stated more than half a century ago, that may be matched with the results of measurements on a well-isolated and available type of microphysical system. A very counterintuitive prediction proclaims The evolution of a measured quantum system becomes slowed down, or, in the extreme, even completely frustrated [11,12]. This prediction, the "quantum Zeno effect" (QZE) [13], has evoked a wealth of theoretical work [14] but very little, and highly controversial experimental evidence. 

---