Pareto priority index: Difference between revisions

From formulasearchengine
Jump to navigation Jump to search
en>Michael Hardy
No edit summary
 
en>Addbot
m Bot: Migrating 1 interwiki links, now provided by Wikidata on d:q7136871
 
Line 1: Line 1:
by Nas, is very fitting and the film agrees with it. The next step is to visit your Word - Press blog dashboard. The Word - Press Dashboard : an administrative management tool that supports FTP content upload  2.  When you have just about any issues concerning exactly where along with the way to employ [http://l.zennethe.net/wordpressbackup38207 wordpress backup plugin], it is possible to e-mail us in our own site. If you are using videos on your site then this is the plugin to use. After activating, you will find their website link and get the activation code from their website. <br><br>As you know today Word - Press has turn out to be a tremendously popular open source publishing and blogging display place. The higher your blog ranks on search engines, the more likely people will find your online marketing site. You are able to set them within your theme options and so they aid the search engine to get a suitable title and description for the pages that get indexed by Google. This is identical to doing a research as in depth above, nevertheless you can see various statistical details like the number of downloads and when the template was not long ago updated. This can be done by using a popular layout format and your unique Word - Press design can be achieved in other elements of the blog. <br><br>Here are a few reasons as to why people prefer Word - Press over other software's. Now if we talk about them one by one then -wordpress blog customization means customization of your blog such as installation of wordpress on your server by wordpress developer which will help you to acquire the SEO friendly blog application integrated with your site design as well as separate blog administration panel for starting up your own business blog,which demands a experienced wordpress designer. Possibly the most downloaded Word - Press plugin, the Google XML Sitemaps plugin but not only automatically creates a site map linking to everyone your pages and posts, it also notifies Google, Bing, Yahoo, and Ask. Nonetheless, with stylish Facebook themes obtainable on the Globe Broad Internet, half of your enterprise is done previously. Have you heard about niche marketing and advertising. <br><br>There has been a huge increase in the number of developers releasing free premium Word - Press themes over the years. I have compiled a few tips on how you can start a food blog and hopefully the following information and tips can help you to get started on your food blogging creative journey. Some examples of its additional features include; code inserter (for use with adding Google Analytics, Adsense section targeting etc) Webmaster verification assistant, Link Mask Generator, Robots. Fast Content Update  - It's easy to edit or add posts with free Wordpress websites. The Pakistani culture is in demand of a main surgical treatment. <br><br>As a open source platform Wordpress offers distinctive ready to use themes for free along with custom theme support and easy customization. As a website owner, you can easily manage CMS-based website in a pretty easy and convenient style. This allows updates to be sent anyone who wants them via an RSS reader or directly to their email. This is because of the customization that works as a keystone for a SEO friendly blogging portal website. Likewise, professional publishers with a multi author and editor setup often find that Word - Press lack basic user and role management capabilities.
The '''Leggett–Garg inequality''',<ref name="LeggettGarg">Quantum Mechanics versus macroscopic realism: is the flux there when nobody looks? A. J. Leggett and Anupam Garg. Phys. Rev. Lett. '''54''', 857 (1985)</ref> named for [[Anthony James Leggett]] and [[Anupam Garg]], is a mathematical inequality fulfilled by all macrorealistic physical theories. Here, macrorealism (macroscopic realism) is a classical worldview defined by the conjunction of two postulates:<ref name="LeggettGarg" />
 
# Macrorealism per se: "A macroscopic object, which has available to it two or more macroscopically distinct states, is at any given time in a definite one of those states."
# Noninvasive measurability: "It is possible in principle to determine which of these states the system is in without any effect on the state itself, or on the subsequent system dynamics."
 
==In quantum mechanics==
In [[quantum mechanics]], the Leggett–Garg inequality is violated, meaning that the time evolution of a system cannot be understood classically. The situation is similar to the violation of [[Bell's theorem|Bell's inequalities]] in [[Bell test experiments]] which plays an important role in understanding the nature of the [[EPR paradox|Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox]]. Here [[quantum entanglement]] plays the central role. The violation of Bell's inequalities rules out local [[hidden variable theories]] which attempt to restore the realism in the sense that definiteness of the outcome in a single measurement can be ensured by using a supplementary variable along with the wave function which can not be obtained in the standard [[Copenhagen Interpretation]] of quantum mechanics in its various formulations.
 
As well as Einstein's famous "God does not play dice" objection to quantum mechanics, there was Einstein's still more fundamental objection that the Moon is still there when nobody looks. If the violation of the Leggett–Garg inequality can be demonstrated on the ''macroscopic scale'', this would challenge even this notion of realism.
 
==Two-state example==
The simplest form of the Leggett–Garg inequality derives from examining a system that has only two possible states. These states have corresponding  measurement values <math>Q=\pm 1</math>. The key here is that we have measurements at two different times, and one or more times between the first and last measurement. The simplest example is where the system is measured at three successive times <math>t_1 < t_2 < t_3 </math>. Now suppose, for instance, that there is a perfect correlation <math> C_{13} </math> of 1 between times <math> t_1 </math> and <math> t_3 </math>. That is to say, that for N realisations of the experiment, the temporal correlation reads
 
: <math>C_{13}=\frac{1}{N} \sum_{r=1}^N Q_r(t_1) Q_r(t_3)=1. </math>
 
We look at this case in some detail. What can be said about what happens at time <math> t_2</math>? Well, it is possible  that <math>C_{12} =C_{23} =1</math>, so that the if the value at
<math> t_1=\pm 1 </math>, then it is also <math> \pm 1 </math> for both times
<math> t_2 </math> and <math> t_3 </math>. It is also quite possible that
that <math> C_{12}=C_{23}=-1 </math>, so that the value at <math>t_1</math> is
flipped twice, and so has the same value at <math>t_3</math> as it did at
<math> t_1 </math>. So, we can have both <math> Q(t_1) </math> and  
<math> Q(t_2) </math> anti-correlated as long as we have <math> Q(t_2) </math>
and <math> Q(t_3) </math> anti-correlated. Yet another possibility is
that there is no correlation between  <math> Q(t_1) </math> and
<math> Q(t_2) </math>. That is we could have <math> C_{12}=C_{23}=0 </math>.
So, although it is known that if <math>Q=\pm 1</math> at <math> t_1</math>
it must also be <math> \pm 1 </math> at <math> t_3 </math>, the value
at <math> t_2 </math> may well as be determined by the toss of a coin.
We define <math> K </math> as <math>K= C_{12}+C_{23}-C_{13}</math>.
In these three cases, we have 
<math>K=1, -3,</math> and <math> -1</math>, respectively.
 
All that was for 100% correlation between times <math>t_1 </math>
and  <math>t_3 </math>. In fact, for any correlation between these
times  <math> K= C_{12}+C_{23}-C_{13} \le 1</math>. To see this, we note that
 
: <math>K=\frac{1}{N} \sum_{r=0}^N \left ( Q(t_1)Q(t_2)+Q(t_2)Q(t_3)
-Q(t_1)Q(t_3) \right )_r. </math>
 
It is easily seen that for every realisation <math> r</math>, the term in the
parentheses must be less than or equal to unity, so that the result for the sum is also less than (or equal to) unity. If we have four distinct times rather than three, we have <math> K= C_{12}+C_{23}+C_{34}-C_{14} \le 2</math> and so on. These are the Leggett–Garg  inequalities. They say something definite about the relation between the temporal correlations of <math> \langle Q(\text{start}) Q(\text{end}) \rangle </math>
and the correlations between successive times in going from the start to the end.
 
In the derivations above, it has been assumed that the quantity Q, representing the state of the system, always has a definite value (macrorealism per se) and that its measurement at a certain time does not change this value nor its subsequent evolution (noninvasive measurability). A violation of the Leggett–Garg inequality implies that at least one of these two assumptions fails.
 
==Experimental violations==
The Leggett–Garg inequality is always violated on the microscopic scale.  
An example is given by Brukner and Kofler in.<ref name="KoflerWork">http://www.fjfi.cvut.cz/workshop/Workshop_Prague_2008/presentations/Brukner_measurements.pdf</ref> However, they have also demonstrated that quantum violations can be found for arbitrarily large ''macroscopic'' systems. As an alternative to [[quantum decoherence]], Brukner and Kofler are proposing a solution of the quantum-to-classical transition in terms of ''coarse-grained'' quantum measurements under which usually no violation of the Leggett–Garg inequality can be seen anymore.<ref name="KoflerPaper">Classical world arising out of quantum physics under the restriction of coarse-grained measurements. Johannes Kofler and Caslav Brukner. Phys. Rev. Lett. '''99''', 180403 (2007), ArXiv 0609079 [quant-ph] Sept. 2006
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0609079</ref><ref name="KoflerPaper2">The conditions for quantum violation of macroscopic realism. Johannes Kofler and Caslav Brukner. Phys. Rev. Lett. '''101''', 090403 (2008), ArXiv 0706.0668 [quant-ph] June 2007
http://arxiv.org/abs/0706.0668</ref>
 
One of the most promising proposed experiments for demonstrating a violation of macroscopic realism employs superconducting quantum interference devices. There, using Josephson junctions, one should be able to prepare macroscopic superpositions of left and right rotating macroscopically large electronic currents in a superconducting ring. Under sufficient suppression of decoherence one should be able to demonstrate a violation of the Leggett–Garg inequality.<ref name="Leggett">Testing the limits of quantum mechanics: motivation, state of play, prospects. A. J. Leggett. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter '''14''', R414-R451 (2002)</ref>
 
A criticism of some other proposed experiments on the Leggett–Garg inequality is that they do not really show a violation of macrorealism because they are essentially about measuring spins of individual particles.<ref name="Interp">Foundations and Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. [[Gennaro Auletta]] and Georgio Parisi, World Scientific, 2001 ISBN 981-02-4614-5, ISBN 978-981-02-4614-3</ref> However, this book cites later work by Mermin <ref name="Mermin">Extreme quantum entanglement in a superpostion of macroscopically distinct states. David Mermin, Phys. Rev. Lett. '''65''' 1838-1840 (1990)</ref> and Braunstein and Mann <ref name="Braunstein" >Noise in Mermin's n-particle Bell inequality. Braunstein, S.L. and Mann, A., Phys. Rev. A '''47''', R2427-R2430 (1993)</ref> which would be better tests of macroscopic realism, but warns that the experiments may be complex enough to admit unforeseen loopholes in the analysis.
 
==Related inequalities==
The four-term Leggett–Garg inequality can be seen to be similar to the [[CHSH inequality]]. Moreover, ''equalities'' were proposed by Jaeger ''et al.''<ref>Bell type equalities for SQUIDs on the assumptions of macroscopic realism and non-invasive measurability. Gregg Jaeger, Chris Viger and Sahotra Sarkar. Phys. Lett. A '''210''', 5-10 (1996)</ref>
 
==See also==
* [[Leggett inequality]]
 
==References==
{{reflist}}
 
{{DEFAULTSORT:Leggett-Garg Inequality}}
[[Category:Quantum information science]]
[[Category:Interpretations of quantum mechanics]]
[[Category:Physics theorems]]
[[Category:Inequalities]]

Latest revision as of 20:57, 19 March 2013

The Leggett–Garg inequality,[1] named for Anthony James Leggett and Anupam Garg, is a mathematical inequality fulfilled by all macrorealistic physical theories. Here, macrorealism (macroscopic realism) is a classical worldview defined by the conjunction of two postulates:[1]

  1. Macrorealism per se: "A macroscopic object, which has available to it two or more macroscopically distinct states, is at any given time in a definite one of those states."
  2. Noninvasive measurability: "It is possible in principle to determine which of these states the system is in without any effect on the state itself, or on the subsequent system dynamics."

In quantum mechanics

In quantum mechanics, the Leggett–Garg inequality is violated, meaning that the time evolution of a system cannot be understood classically. The situation is similar to the violation of Bell's inequalities in Bell test experiments which plays an important role in understanding the nature of the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox. Here quantum entanglement plays the central role. The violation of Bell's inequalities rules out local hidden variable theories which attempt to restore the realism in the sense that definiteness of the outcome in a single measurement can be ensured by using a supplementary variable along with the wave function which can not be obtained in the standard Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics in its various formulations.

As well as Einstein's famous "God does not play dice" objection to quantum mechanics, there was Einstein's still more fundamental objection that the Moon is still there when nobody looks. If the violation of the Leggett–Garg inequality can be demonstrated on the macroscopic scale, this would challenge even this notion of realism.

Two-state example

The simplest form of the Leggett–Garg inequality derives from examining a system that has only two possible states. These states have corresponding measurement values Q=±1. The key here is that we have measurements at two different times, and one or more times between the first and last measurement. The simplest example is where the system is measured at three successive times t1<t2<t3. Now suppose, for instance, that there is a perfect correlation C13 of 1 between times t1 and t3. That is to say, that for N realisations of the experiment, the temporal correlation reads

C13=1Nr=1NQr(t1)Qr(t3)=1.

We look at this case in some detail. What can be said about what happens at time t2? Well, it is possible that C12=C23=1, so that the if the value at t1=±1, then it is also ±1 for both times t2 and t3. It is also quite possible that that C12=C23=1, so that the value at t1 is flipped twice, and so has the same value at t3 as it did at t1. So, we can have both Q(t1) and Q(t2) anti-correlated as long as we have Q(t2) and Q(t3) anti-correlated. Yet another possibility is that there is no correlation between Q(t1) and Q(t2). That is we could have C12=C23=0. So, although it is known that if Q=±1 at t1 it must also be ±1 at t3, the value at t2 may well as be determined by the toss of a coin. We define K as K=C12+C23C13. In these three cases, we have K=1,3, and 1, respectively.

All that was for 100% correlation between times t1 and t3. In fact, for any correlation between these times K=C12+C23C131. To see this, we note that

K=1Nr=0N(Q(t1)Q(t2)+Q(t2)Q(t3)Q(t1)Q(t3))r.

It is easily seen that for every realisation r, the term in the parentheses must be less than or equal to unity, so that the result for the sum is also less than (or equal to) unity. If we have four distinct times rather than three, we have K=C12+C23+C34C142 and so on. These are the Leggett–Garg inequalities. They say something definite about the relation between the temporal correlations of Q(start)Q(end) and the correlations between successive times in going from the start to the end.

In the derivations above, it has been assumed that the quantity Q, representing the state of the system, always has a definite value (macrorealism per se) and that its measurement at a certain time does not change this value nor its subsequent evolution (noninvasive measurability). A violation of the Leggett–Garg inequality implies that at least one of these two assumptions fails.

Experimental violations

The Leggett–Garg inequality is always violated on the microscopic scale. An example is given by Brukner and Kofler in.[2] However, they have also demonstrated that quantum violations can be found for arbitrarily large macroscopic systems. As an alternative to quantum decoherence, Brukner and Kofler are proposing a solution of the quantum-to-classical transition in terms of coarse-grained quantum measurements under which usually no violation of the Leggett–Garg inequality can be seen anymore.[3][4]

One of the most promising proposed experiments for demonstrating a violation of macroscopic realism employs superconducting quantum interference devices. There, using Josephson junctions, one should be able to prepare macroscopic superpositions of left and right rotating macroscopically large electronic currents in a superconducting ring. Under sufficient suppression of decoherence one should be able to demonstrate a violation of the Leggett–Garg inequality.[5]

A criticism of some other proposed experiments on the Leggett–Garg inequality is that they do not really show a violation of macrorealism because they are essentially about measuring spins of individual particles.[6] However, this book cites later work by Mermin [7] and Braunstein and Mann [8] which would be better tests of macroscopic realism, but warns that the experiments may be complex enough to admit unforeseen loopholes in the analysis.

Related inequalities

The four-term Leggett–Garg inequality can be seen to be similar to the CHSH inequality. Moreover, equalities were proposed by Jaeger et al.[9]

See also

References

43 year old Petroleum Engineer Harry from Deep River, usually spends time with hobbies and interests like renting movies, property developers in singapore new condominium and vehicle racing. Constantly enjoys going to destinations like Camino Real de Tierra Adentro.

  1. 1.0 1.1 Quantum Mechanics versus macroscopic realism: is the flux there when nobody looks? A. J. Leggett and Anupam Garg. Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 857 (1985)
  2. http://www.fjfi.cvut.cz/workshop/Workshop_Prague_2008/presentations/Brukner_measurements.pdf
  3. Classical world arising out of quantum physics under the restriction of coarse-grained measurements. Johannes Kofler and Caslav Brukner. Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 180403 (2007), ArXiv 0609079 [quant-ph] Sept. 2006 http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0609079
  4. The conditions for quantum violation of macroscopic realism. Johannes Kofler and Caslav Brukner. Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 090403 (2008), ArXiv 0706.0668 [quant-ph] June 2007 http://arxiv.org/abs/0706.0668
  5. Testing the limits of quantum mechanics: motivation, state of play, prospects. A. J. Leggett. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 14, R414-R451 (2002)
  6. Foundations and Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Gennaro Auletta and Georgio Parisi, World Scientific, 2001 ISBN 981-02-4614-5, ISBN 978-981-02-4614-3
  7. Extreme quantum entanglement in a superpostion of macroscopically distinct states. David Mermin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 1838-1840 (1990)
  8. Noise in Mermin's n-particle Bell inequality. Braunstein, S.L. and Mann, A., Phys. Rev. A 47, R2427-R2430 (1993)
  9. Bell type equalities for SQUIDs on the assumptions of macroscopic realism and non-invasive measurability. Gregg Jaeger, Chris Viger and Sahotra Sarkar. Phys. Lett. A 210, 5-10 (1996)