arxiv:quant-ph/ v8 25 Mar 2009

Transcription

1 Collapse moels: analysis of the free particle ynamics Angelo Bassi Mathematisches Institut er Universität München, Theresienstr. 39, München, Germany, The Abus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Straa Costiera 11, Trieste, Italy. arxiv:quant-ph/0410v8 5 Mar 009 We stuy a moel of spontaneous wavefunction collapse for a free quantum particle. We analyze in etail the time evolution of the single Gaussian solution an the ouble Gaussian solution, showing how the reuction mechanism inuces the localization of the wavefunction in space; we also stuy the asymptotic behavior of the general solution. With an appropriate choice for the parameter λ which sets the strength of the collapse mechanism, we prove that: i) the effects of the reucing terms on the ynamics of microscopic systems are negligible, the physical preictions of the moel being very close to those of stanar quantum mechanics; ii) at the macroscopic scale, the moel reprouces classical mechanics: the wavefunction of the center of mass of a macro object behaves, with high accuracy, like a point moving in space accoring to Newton s laws. PACS numbers: Ta, 0.50.Ey, a I. INTRODUCTION Moels of spontaneous wavefunction collapse 1,, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 1, 13, 14, 15 have reache significant results in proviing a solution to the measurement problem of quantum mechanics. This goal is achieve by moifying the Schröinger equation, aing appropriate non linear stochastic terms 1 : such terms o not moify appreciably the stanar quantum ynamics of microscopic systems; at the same time, they rapily reuce the superposition of two or more macroscopically ifferent states of a macro object into one of them; in particular, they guarantee that measurements mae on microscopic systems always have efinite outcomes, an with the correct quantum probabilities. In this way, collapse moels escribe within one single ynamical framework both the quantum properties of microscopic systems an the classical properties of macroscopic objects, proviing a unifie escription of micro an macro phenomena. In this paper, we investigate the physical properties of a collapse moel escribing the (one imensional) evolution of a free quantum particle subject to spontaneous localizations in space; its ynamics is governe by the following stochastic ifferential equation in the Hilbert space L (R): ψ t (x) = i p m t + λ(q q t )W t λ (q q t) t ψ t (x), (1) where q an p are the position an momentum operators, respectively, an q t ψ t q ψ t enotes the quantum average of the operator q; m is the mass of the particle, while λ is a positive constant which sets the strength of the collapse mechanism. The stochastic ynamics is governe by a stanar Wiener process W t, efine on the probability space (Ω, F, P) with the natural filtration {F t : t 0} efine on it. The value of the collapse constant λ is given by the formula : λ = m m 0 λ 0, () where m 0 is a reference mass which we choose to be equal to that of a nucleon, an λ 0 is a fixe constant which we take equal to: λ 0 10 m sec 1 ; (3) this value correspons to the prouct of the two parameters Λ GRW an α GRW of the GRW collapse moel 1, where Λ GRW sec 1 is the localization rate for a nucleon an 1/ α GRW 10 7 m is the with of the Gaussian wavefunction inucing the localizations. Eq. (1) has alreay been subject to investigation: in ref 10 a theorem proves the existence an uniqueness of strong solutions 3 ; in refs 5, 8, 10, 0 some properties of the solutions have been analyze: in particular, it has been shown that Gaussian wavefunctions are solutions of Eq. (1), that their sprea reaches an asymptotic finite value (we speak in this case of a stationary solution), an that the general solution reaches asymptotically a stationary Gaussian solution. Finally, in ref 6, Eq. (1) has been first propose as a universal moel of wavefunction collapse. Electronic aress: bassi@mathematik.uni-muenchen.e 1 If one aims at reproucing the process of wavefunction collapse in measurement like situation, the terms which have to be ae to the Schröinger equation must be non linear an stochastic, since these two are the characteristic features of the quantum collapse process. Differently from 6, we assume that λ is proportional to the mass of the particle. 3 Existence an uniqueness theorems for a wie class of stochastic ifferential equations whose coefficients are boune operators, are stuie in ref 16. The case of unboune operators is covere in ref 17. See ref 18, 19 for an introuction to stochastic ifferential equation in infinite imensional spaces.

2 The aim of our work is to provie a etaile analysis of the physical properties of the solutions of Eq. (1). After some mathematical preliminaries (Sec. II), we will stuy the time evolution of the two most interesting types of wavefunctions: the single Gaussian (Sec. III) an the ouble Gaussian wavefunctions (Sec. IV); in Sec. V we will iscuss the asymptotic behavior of the general solution. We will next stuy the effects of the stochastic ynamics on microscopic systems (Sec. VI) an on macroscopic objects (Sec. VII); in the first case, we will see that the preiction of the moel are very close to those of stanar quantum mechanics, while in the secon case we will show that the wavefunction of a macro object is well localize in space an behaves like a point moving in space accoring to the classical laws of motion. We en up with some concluing remarks (Sec. VIII). II. LINEAR VS NON LINEAR EQUATION The easiest way to fin solutions of a non linear equation is when feasible to linearize it: this is possible for Eq. (1) an the proceure is well known in the literature, 3, 10, 15, 16, 17. Let us consier the following linear stochastic ifferential equation: φ t (x) = i p m t + λq ξ t λ q t φ t (x); (4) ξ t is a stanar Wiener process efine on the probability space (Ω, F, Q), where Q is a new probability measure, whose connection with P will be clear in what follows. Contrary to Eq. (1), the above equation oes not preserve the norm of statevectors, so let us efine the normalize vectors: ψ t = { φ t / φ t if: φ t 0, a fixe unit vector if: φ t = 0. (5) By using Itô calculus, it is not ifficult to show that ψ t efine by (5) is a solution of Eq. (1), whenever φ t solves Eq. (4). We now briefly explain the relations between the two probability measures Q an P, an between the two Wiener processes ξ t an W t. The key property of Eq. (4) is that p t φ t is a martingale 10, 17 satisfying the following stochastic ifferential equation: p t = λ q t p t ξ t, (6) with q t = ψ t q ψ t. As a consequence of the martingale property (an assuming, as we shall always o, that φ 0 = 1) p t can be use to generate a new probability measure P on (Ω, F) 19; we choose Q in such a way that the new measure P coincies with P. Given this, Girsanov s theorem 1 provies a simple relation between the Wiener process ξ t efine on (Ω, F, Q), an the Wiener process W t efine on (Ω, F, P): W t = ξ t λ t 0 q s s. (7) The above results imply that one can fin the solution ψ t of Eq. (1), given the initial conition ψ 0, by using the following proceure: 1. Fin the solution φ t of Eq. (4), with the initial conition φ 0 = ψ 0.. Normalize the solution: φ t ψ t = φ t / φ t. 3. Make the substitution: ξ t W t + λ q t. The avantage of such an approach is that one can exploit the linear character of Eq. (4) to analyze the properties of the nonlinear Eq. (1); as we shall see, the ifficult part will be computing q t from φ t (step 3): this is where non linearity enters in a non trivial way. III. SINGLE GAUSSIAN SOLUTION We start our analysis by taking, as a solution, a single Gaussian wavefunction 4 : φ S t(x) = exp a t (x x t ) + ik t x + γ t, (8) where a t an γ t are suppose to be complex functions of time, while x t an k t are taken to be real 5. By inserting (8) into Eq. (4), one fins the following sets of stochastic ifferential equations 6 : a t = λ i m (a t) t (9) x t = λ m k t t + ξ t λx t t (10) k t = λ ai t ξ t λx t t (11) γt R = λx t + m ai t t + λx t ξ t λx t t (1) γt I = m ar t m k t t + λ ai t x t ξ t λx t t. (13) For a single Gaussian wavefunction, the two equations for γ t can be omitte since the real part of γ t is absorbe 4 See ref for an analogous iscussion within the CSL moel of wavefunction collapse. 5 For simplicity, we will assume in the following that the initial values of these parameters o not epen on ω Ω. 6 The superscripts R an I enote, respectively, the real an imaginary parts of the corresponing quantities.

3 3 into the normalization factor, while the imaginary part gives an irrelevant global fase. The normalization proceure is trivial, an also the Girsanov transformation (7) is easy since, for a Gaussian wavefunction like (8), one simply has q t = x t. We then have the following set of stochastic ifferential equations for the relevant parameters: a t = λ i m (a t) t, (14) x t = λ m k t t + W t, (15) Schröinger evolution Moifie evolution k t = λ ai t W t ; (16) throughout this section, we will iscuss the physical implications of these equations. FIG. 1: The picture shows the time evolution (t measure in secons) of the sprea in position σ q(t) (measure in meters) of a Gaussian wavefunction, as given by the Schröinger equation an by the stochastic equation. The simulation has been mae for a nucleon (m = m 0). The initial sprea has been taken equal to 10 3 m. A. The equation for a t Eq. (14) for a t can be easily solve 8, 10: a t = c tanh b t + k, (17) c = (1 i) 1 mλ λ, b = (1 + i) m, k = tanh 1 a 0 c. (18) After some algebra, one obtains the following analytical expressions for the real an the imaginary parts of a t : = λ ω a I t = λ ω sinh(ωt + ϕ 1 ) + sin(ωt + ϕ ) cosh(ωt + ϕ 1 ) + cos(ωt + ϕ ), (19) sinh(ωt + ϕ 1 ) sin(ωt + ϕ ) cosh(ωt + ϕ 1 ) + cos(ωt + ϕ ), (0) where we have efine the frequency: λ0 ω = 10 5 sec 1, (1) m 0 which oes not epen on the mass of the particle. The two parameters ϕ 1 an ϕ are functions of the initial conition: ϕ 1 = k R, ϕ = k I. An important property of is positivity: a R 0 > 0 > 0 t > 0, () which guarantees that an initially Gaussian wavefunction oes not iverge at any later time. To prove this, we first note that the enominator of (19) cannot be negative; if it is equal to zero then also the numerator is zero: this iscontinuity can be remove by using expression (17) for a t, which accoring to the values (18) for b an k is analytic for any t. It is then sufficient to show that the numerator remains positive throughout time. Let us consier the function f(t) = sinh(ωt + ϕ 1 ) + sin(ωt + ϕ ); we have that f(0) > 0 an f (t) 0 for any t, which implies that f(t) > 0 for any t, as esire. Note that positivity of matches with the fact that Eq. (1) preserves the norm of statevectors. B. The sprea in position an momentum The time evolution of the sprea in position an momentum of the Gaussian wavefunction (8), σ q (t) = q q = 1 1, σ p (t) = p p ( = ) + (a I t ), (3) is given by the following analytical expressions: cosh(ωt + ϕ 1 ) + cos(ωt + ϕ ) σ q (t) = mω sinh(ωt + ϕ 1 ) + sin(ωt + ϕ ), (4) mω cosh(ωt + ϕ 1 ) cos(ωt + ϕ ) σ p (t) = sinh(ωt + ϕ 1 ) + sin(ωt + ϕ ). (5) Fig. 1 shows the ifferent time epenence of the sprea in position, as given by the Schröinger equation an by the stochastic equation: as we see, at the beginning the two evolutions almost coincie; as time increases, while in the stanar quantum case the sprea goes to infinity, the sprea accoring to our stochastic equation reaches the asymptotic value: σ q ( ) = mω ( Kg m ) m, (6)

4 4 which of course epens on the mass m of the particle. This behavior can be unerstoo as follows: the reuction terms (which ten to localize the wavefunction) an the stanar quantum Hamiltonian (which tens to sprea out the wavefunction) compete against each other until an equilibrium the stationary solution is reache, which epens on the values of the parameters of the moel. Also the sprea in momentum changes in time, reaching the asymptotic value: σ p ( ) = mω ( ) m Kg m Kg sec (7) It is interesting to compare the two asymptotic values for the sprea in position an momentum; one has: σ q ( )σ p ( ) = (8) which correspons to almost the minimum allowe by Heisenberg s uncertainty relations 1, 0: the collapse moel, then, inuces almost the best possible localization of the wavefunction both in position an momentum. In accorance with 5, any Gaussian wavefunction having these asymptotic values for σ q an σ p will be calle a stationary solution 7 of Eq. (1). Note the interesting fact that the evolution of the sprea in position an momentum is eterministic an epens on the noise only inirectly, through the constant λ. C. The mean in position an momentum The quantities q t = x t an p t = k t, corresponing to the peak of the Gaussian wavefunction in the position an momentum spaces, respectively, satisfy the following stochastic ifferential equations: q t = 1 m p tt + λ 1 p t = λ ai t W t, (9) W t. (30) Their average values obey the classical equations 8 for a free particle of mass m: m t E q t = E p t, (31) E p t = p 0, (3) 7 Strictly speaking, a stationary solution is not stationary at all, since both the mean in position an the mean in momentum may change in time as it happens in our case; the term stationary refers only to the sprea of the wavefunction. 8 These equations can be consiere as the stochastic extension of Ehrenfest s theorem. while the coefficients of covariance matrix q t E q C(t) = E t q t E q t p t E p t p t E p t Cq (t) C qp (t) C pq (t) C p (t) evolve as follows: t C q (t) = m C qp(t) + λ 1 4 ( ), (33) t C qp(t) = 1 m C λ a I t p(t), (34) ( ) ( ) a I t C p(t) = t λ. (35) Particularly interesting is the thir equation, which implies that the wavefunction picks larger an larger components in momentum, as time increases; as a consequence, the energy of the system increases in time, as it can be seen by writing own the stochastic ifferential for H t p t /m: H t = λ m t λ m from which it follows that: a I t p t W t, (36) t E H t = λ m = λ 0 m J/sec. (37) This energy non conservation is a typical feature of space collapse moels, but with our choice for the parameter λ, the increase is so weak that it cannot be etecte with present ay technology (see ref. 1). IV. DOUBLE GAUSSIAN SOLUTION We now stuy the time evolution of the superposition of two Gaussian wavefunctions; such an analysis is interesting since it allows to unerstan in a quite simple an clear way how the reuction mechanism works, i.e. how the superposition of two ifferent position states is reuce into one of them. To this purpose, let us consier the following wavefunction: φ D t (x) = φ 1t (x) + φ t (x) = = exp a 1t (x x 1t ) + ik 1t x + γ 1t + exp a t (x x t ) + ik t x + γ t ; (38) we follow the strategy outline in Sec. II, by first fining the solution of the linear equation. Because of linearity, φ D t (x) is automatically a solution of Eq. (4), provie that its parameters satisfy Eqs. (9) to (13). The ifficult part of the analysis is relate to the change of measure: the reason is that in the ouble Gaussian case the quantum average q t is not simply

5 5 equal to x 1t or x t, as it is for a single Gaussian wavefunction, but is a nontrivial function 9 of all the parameters efining φ D t (x); in spite of this ifficulty, the most interesting properties of the ynamical evolution of φ D t (x) can be analyze in a rigorous way. We first observe that the two equations for a 1t an a t are eterministic an thus insensitive of the change of measure; accoringly, the sprea (both in position an in momentum) of the two Gaussian functions efining φ D t (x) evolve inepenently of each other, an maintain all the properties iscusse in the previous section. For simplicity, we assume that a 1t = a t at t = 0 so that these two parameters will remain equal at any subsequent time. A. The asymptotic behavior Let us consier the ifferences X t = x t x 1t an K t = k t k 1t between the peaks of the two Gaussian functions in the position an in the momentum spaces; they satisfy the following set of equations: Xt K t = A1 (t) /m A (t) 0 Xt t, (39) K t A 1 (t) = ω cosh(ωt + ϕ 1) + cos(ωt + ϕ ) sinh(ωt + ϕ 1 ) + sin(ωt + ϕ ), (40) A (t) = λ sinh(ωt + ϕ 1) sin(ωt + ϕ ) sinh(ωt + ϕ 1 ) + sin(ωt + ϕ ). (41) We see this is the reason why we have taken into account the ifferences X t an K t that the above system of equations is eterministic, so it oes not epen on the change of measure. The coefficients of the matrix A(t) efining the linear system (39) are analytic in the variable t, an the Liapunov s type numbers 4 of the system are the same as those of the linear system obtaine by replacing A(t) with A( ), where: A( ) lim A(t) = t + ω /m λ 0 The eigenvalues of the matrix A( ) are:. (4) µ 1, = 1 (1 ± i) ω, (43) from which it follows that the linear system (39) has only one Lyapunov s type number: ω/. This implies that, for any non trivial (vector) solution Z(t) of (39), one has: lim t + ln Z(t) t = ω lim Z(t) = 0. (44) t + 9 This is the reason why the ynamics of these parameters changes in a raical way, with respect to the single Gaussian case. We arrive at the following result: asymptotically, the ifference x t x 1t between the peaks of the two Gaussian wavefunctions in the position space goes to zero; also the ifference k t k 1t between the peaks of the two Gaussian wavefunctions in the momentum space vanishes. In other wors, the two Gaussian wavefunctions converge towar each other, an asymptotically they become one single Gaussian wavefunction which, from the analysis of the previous subsection, is a stationary solution of the stochastic equation (1). Anyway, this behavior in general cannot be responsible for the collapse of a macroscopic superposition; as a matter of fact, let us consier the following situation which, for later convenience, we call situation A : i) The wavefunction is in a superposition of the form (38) an, at time t = 0 (consequently, also for any later t), a 1t an a t are equal to their asymptotic value; ii) The istance K t k t k 1t is zero at time t = 0. Uner these assumptions, the linear system (39) can be easily solve an one gets: X t = X 0 e ωt/ cos ωt ωt sin. (45) We see that the time evolution of X t is inepenent of the mass of the particle: this result implies that, when the sprea of the two Gaussian wavefunctions is equal to its asymptotic value 10, their istance ecreases with a rate ω/ 10 5 sec 1, which is too slow to justify a possible collapse, in particular at the macro level. B. The collapse Now we show that the collapse of the wavefunction occurs because, uring the evolution, one of the two Gaussian wavefunctions is suppresse with respect to the other one 11 ; the quantity which measure this amping is the ifference Γ R t = γ R t γ R 1t, which satisfies the stochastic ifferential equation: Γ R t = λx t x 1t + x t q t t + λx t W t ; (46) if Γ R t +, then φ 1 is suppresse with respect to φ an the superposition practically reuces to φ ; the opposite happens if Γ R t. To be more precise, we introuce a positive constant b which we assume to be conveniently large (let us say, b = 10) an we say that the superposition is suppresse when Γ R b; moreover, we say that: φ D is reuce to φ 1 when: φ D is reuce to φ when: Γ R b, Γ R +b. 10 We will see in Sec. VII that at the macroscopic level the sprea of a Gaussian wavefunction converges very rapily towars its asymptotic value. 11 Accoringly, the collapse mechanism is precisely the same as the one of the original GRW moel 1.

6 6 We now stuy the time evolution of Γ R t. By writing q t in terms of the coefficients efining φ D t (x): q t = π x 1t e γr 1t + xt e γr t + δt e γr 1t +γr t it is not ifficult to prove that Eq. (46) becomes: (47) Γ R t = λx t tanh Γ R t t + g t (Γ R t )t + λx t W t, (48) where we have efine the following quantities: δ t = h t (x 1t + x t )cosθ t + Y t sin θ t, (49) g t (Γ R t ) = λx t h t e ΓR t (50) Y t sin θ t 1 + e ΓR t + X t cosθ t 1 e ΓR t 1 + e Γ R t + h t cosθ t e ΓR t 1 + e Γ R t an: h t = exp ar t ( X t + Yt ), (51) Y t = ai t X t + K t, (5) θ t = 1 (x 1t + x t )K t + Γ I t, Γ I t = γ I t γ I 1t, (53) with a R 1t = ar t. Eq. (48) cannot be solve exactly, ue to the presence of the term g t (Γ R t ) which is a non simple function of Γ R t ; to circumvent this problem, we procee as follows. We stuy the following stochastic ifferential equation: Γ R t = λx t tanh Γ R t t + λx t W t, (54) which correspons to Eq. (48) without the term g t (Γ R t ), an at the en of the subsection we estimate the error mae by ignoring such a term. In stuying Eq. (54), it is convenient to introuce the following time change: t s t = λ t 0 Xu u. (55) Xt is a continuous, ifferentiable an non negative function, which we can assume not to be ientically zero 1 in any sub interval of R + ; as a consequence, s t is a monotone increasing thus invertible function of t an Eq. (55) efines a goo time change. Uner this time substitution, Eq. (54) becomes: Γ R s = tanh Γ R s s + W s, (56) 1 If there exists an interval I of R + such that X t 0 t I, then Eq. (39) implies that X t remains equal to 0 for any subsequent time, i.e. the two Gaussian wavefunctions coincie. where W s = λ s 0 X t W t (57) is a Wiener process 13 with respect to the filtere space (Ω, F, {F s : s 0}, P). Note that, since accoring to Eq. (44), X t in general ecays exponentially in time, s <, an Eq. (56) is physically meaningful only within the interval 14 0, s ). Eq. (56) can be analyze in great etail 5; in particular, the following properties can be proven to hol 15 : 1. Let us efine the collapse time S b inf{s : Γ R s b}: this time is finite with probability 1 an its average value is equal to 16 : ES b = b tanhb b 0 tanhb 0. (58) If b 0 b (which occurs when both terms of the superposition give a non vanishing contribution), an since we have assume b 10, then ES b b.. The variance VS b ES b E S b is given by 17 : VS b = F(b) F(b 0 ), (59) F(x) = x tanh x + xtanhx x. (60) Note that since F(x) is an even, positive function, increasing for positive values of x, it follows that VS b > 0 whenever b 0 < b, as it assume to be. 3. The collapse probability P φ that φ D is reuce to φ, i.e. that Γ R s hits point b before point b is given by18 : P φ = 1 tanhb + tanhb 0 ; (61) tanhb accoring to our choice for b, tanhb 1, an consequently e γr 0 P φ tanhb 0 = = e γr 10 + e γr 0 φ 0 = φ 10 + φ 0, (6) which (neglecting the overlapping between the two Gaussian wavefunctions) correspons to the stanar quantum prescription for the probability that φ D collapses to φ. 13 See pages of Thus, strictly speaking, Eq. (57) efines a Wiener process only for s s ; we then exten in a stanar way the process to the interval (s, ). 15 Throughout the analysis, we will assume that Γ R 0 b 0 ( b, b). 16 See theorem, page 108 of See theorem 3, page 109 of See theorem 4, page 110 of 5.

7 7 4. The elocalization probability, i.e. the probability P Del φ that Γ R t goes below b η before time s, after having reache b (η is a positive quantity smaller than b), is 19 : P Del φ 1 P {inf Γ R s > b η} = tanhη = 1 (1 + tanhb) 1 + tanhη. (63) In the above efinition, we have require a elocalization to occur before time s because since s correspons to t = a elocalization at a time s oes not correspon to a real physical elocalization. If, for example, we take η = 3, we have that Pφ Del This conclues our analysis of the statistical behavior of Γ R s. We en this section by iscussing how one can estimate the error mae in neglecting the term g t (Γ R t ) in Eq. (48), i.e. in stuying Γ R s in place of Γ R s. In Appenix A the following estimate for g t (Γ R t ) is given: g t (Γ R t ) λ ( X t + Y t ) (64) e ar t ( Xt + Yt )/4 1 λxt e ar m X m /4 1, (65) where a R m an X m are the minimum values an X t take uring the time interval one is consiering. For example, if we take a 1 g object an we assume that a R m = ar an X m = 1 cm, then we have: c 1 e ar m X m /4 1 1 e 10, (66) which is very close to zero. By using inequality (65) an lemma 4, pag. 10 of 5, one can easily show that Γ R s Γ R s Γ R+ s, where Γ R± s are solutions of the following two stochastic ifferential equations: Γ R± s = tanh Γ R± s ± c s + W s, (67) with an obvious meaning of the signs (as before, we have move from the variable t to the variable s). Eqs. (67) can be analyze along the same lines followe in stuying Eq. (56), getting basically the same results, ue to the very small value c takes in most relevant physical situations. This kin of analysis will be one in etail in a future paper: there, we will stuy the most important case where a macroscopic superposition can be create, i.e. a measurement like situation in which a macroscopic object acting like a measuring apparatus interacts with a microscopic system being initially in a superposition of two eigenstates of the operator which is measure; we will show that, throughout the interaction, the wavefunction of the apparatus is with 19 See formula 6, page 117 of 5. extremely high probability always localize in space, an that the measurement has a efinite outcome with the correct quantum probabilities. V. GENERAL SOLUTION: THE ASYMPTOTIC BEHAVIOR In this section we analyze the asymptotic behavior of the general solution of Eq. (1), showing that as time increases any wavefunction collapses towars a stationary Gaussian solution. A. The collapse We have seen in the previous sections that both the single Gaussian an ouble Gaussian solutions asymptotically converge towars a stationary solution having the form: ψ t (x) = 4 a R π exp a (x x t ) + ik t x, (68) a = lim a t = λ (1 i); (69) t + ω it becomes then natural to ask whether such a kin of wavefunction is the asymptotic limit of any initial wavefunction. The answer is positive 0 as we shall now see by following the same strategy use in refs. 11, 14, 0 to prove convergence of solutions. Since a wavefunction of the form (68) is an eigenstate of the operator: A = q + i 1 mω p, (70) the proof consists in showing that the variance 0 : A t ψ t A A A A ψ t (71) converges to 0 for t +. The following expression for A t hols: A t = q t + m ω p t Σ(q, p) mω mω, (7) Σ(q, p) = 1 ψ t q q p p ψ t + ψ t p p q q ψ t (73) 0 In fact, it is easy to prove that A t = 0 if an only if ψ t is an eigenstate of the operator A, from which it follows that A t 0 if an only if ψ t converges towars an eigenstate of A. In Eq. (71), A ψ t Aψ t, an similarly for A.

8 8 After a rather long calculation, one fins that: t E A t = E ω A t + λ ( q t σq ( )) ( +λ q t ) Σ(q, p) 0. mω (74) Since, by efinition, E A t is a non negative quantity, Eq. (74) is consistent if an only if the right han sie asymptotically vanishes. This, in particular, implies that A t t + except for a subset of Ω of measure zero. 0, (75) We now analyze the probability that the wavefunction, as a result of the collapse process, lies within a given region of space 1. To this purpose, let us consier the following probability measure, efine on the Borel sigma algebra B(R): µ t ( ) E P P ψ t, (76) where P is the projection operator associate to the Borel subset of R. Such a measure is ientifie by the ensity p t (x) E P ψ t (x) : µ t ( ) = p t (x)x, (77) an it can be easily shown that the ensity p t (x) correspons to the iagonal element x ρ t x of the statistical operator ρ t E P ψ t ψ t, which satisfies the Linbla type equation: B. The collapse probability t ρ t = i m p, ρ t λ q, q, ρ t. (78) The solution of the above equation, expresse in terms of the solution q 1 ρ S (t) q of the pure Schröinger equation (λ = 0), is 3 : q 1 ρ(t) q = 1 π + k + y e (i/ )ky Fk, q 1 q, t q 1 + y ρ S (t) q + y, (79) Fk, x, t = exp λ (x t ) km k xt + 3m t. (80) The Hermitian symmetry of q 1 ρ(t) q follows from the fact that Fk, x, t = F k, x, t; for λ = 0 we have Fk, x, t = 1 so that q 1 ρ(t) q = q 1 ρ S (t) q as it must be. From Eq. (79) it follows that: + + p t (x) = 1 k y e (i/ )ky Fk, 0, tp S t (x+y) π (81) where p S t (x) = x ρ S(t) x is the stanar quantum probability ensity of fining the particle locate x in a position measurement. One can easily perform the integration over the k variable an he gets: p t (x) = αt π + y e αty p S t (x + y), (8) For a macroscopic object (let us say m 1 g) an for very long times (e.g. t 0, 10 8 sec 3 years, a time interval which of course is much longer than the time uring which an object can be kept isolate so that the free particle approximation hols true) α t is a very large number, so large that the exponential function in Eq. (8) is significantly more narrow than p S t (x), for most typical wavefunctions (in Sec. VII A we will see that the asymptotic sprea of the wavefunction of a 1 g object is about m). Accoringly, this exponential function acts like a Dirac elta an one has: p t (x) p S t (x), with very high accuracy. This in turn implies that: µ t ( ) P ψ Sch t : (84) α t = 3m 0 λ 0 m t ( m kg ) (sec ) 3. (83) t 1 Of course, wavefunctions in general o not have a compact support; accoringly, saying that a wavefunction lies within a given region of space amounts to saying that it is almost entirely containe within the region, except for small tails spreaing out of that region.

9 9 in other wors, the probability measure µ t ( ) is very close to the quantum probability of fining the particle lying in in a position measurement. We still have to iscuss the physical meaning of the probability measure µ t ( ) efine by Eq. (76); such a iscussion is relevant only at the macroscopic level, since we nee only macro objects to be well localize in space (an with the correct quantum probabilities). As alreay anticipate the sprea of a wavefunction of a macro object having the mass of e.g. 1 g reaches in a very short time a value which is close to the asymptotic sprea σ q ( ) m; then, if we take for an interval a, b whose length is much greater than σ q ( ) for example, we can take b a = 10 7 m, which is sufficiently small for all practical purposes only those wavefunctions whose mean lies aroun give a non vanishing contribution to µ t ( ). As a consequence, with the above choices for (an, of course, waiting a time sufficiently long in orer for the reuction to have occurre), the measure µ t ( ) represents a goo probability measure that the wavefunction collapses within. VI. EFFECT OF THE REDUCING TERMS ON THE MICROSCOPIC DYNAMICS In the previous sections we have stuie some analytical properties of the solutions of the stochastic ifferential equation (1); we now focus our attention on the ynamics for a microscopic particle. The time evolution of a (free) quantum particle has three characteristic features: 1. The wavefunction is subject to a localization process, which, at the micro level, is extremely slow, almost negligible. For example, with reference to the situation A we have efine at the en of Sec. IVA, Eq. (45) shows that the istance X t between the centers of the two Gaussian wavefunctions remains practically unaltere for about 10 5 sec; uner the approximation X t X 0, Eqs. (55) an (58) imply that the time necessary for one of the two Gaussians to be suppresse is: ET b 10 6 ( m X 0 ) sec ET b 10 3 ( m X 0 ) sec for an electron, for a nucleon, which are very long times 4, compare with the characteristic times of a quantum experiment. The efinition ρ t E P ψ t ψ t is rather formal; see 16, 17 for a rigorous efinition. 3 Ref. 1, Appenix C, shows how the solution can be obtaine. 4 In the first case, inee, the reuction time is longer than the time uring which the approximation X t X 0 is vali see Eq. (45). Cause of ecoherence 10 3 cm 10 6 cm ust particle large molecule Air molecules Laboratory vacuum Sunlight on earth K photons Cosmic backgroun ra COLLAPSE TABLE I: λ in cm sec 1 for ecoherence arising from ifferent kins of scattering processes (taken from Joos an Zeh 6). In the last line: λ for the collapse moel given by Eq. (1).. The sprea of the wavefunction reaches an asymptotic value which epens on the mass of the particle: σ q ( ) 1 m σ q ( ) 1 cm for an electron, for a nucleon. 3. The wavefunction unergoes a ranom motion both in position an momentum, uner the influence of the stochastic process. These fluctuations can be quite relevant at the microscopic level; for example, for a stationary solution, one has from Eq. (33): t V q t 1 m /sec t V q t 10 3 m /sec for an electron, for a nucleon. This is the physical picture of a microscopic particle as it emerges from the collapse moel. In orer for the moel to be physically consistent, it must reprouce at the microscopic level the preictions of stanar quantum mechanics, an issue which we are now going to iscuss. Within the collapse moel, measurable quantities are given? by averages of the form E P O t, where O is (in principle) any self ajoint operator. It is not ifficult to prove that: E P O t = Tr Oρ t, (85) where the statistical operator ρ t E P ψ t ψ t satisfies the Linbla type Eq. (78). This is a typical master equation use in ecoherence theory to escribe the interaction between a quantum particle an the surrouning environment 6; consequently, as far as experimental results are concerne, the preictions of our moel are similar to those of ecoherence moels 5. It becomes then 5 We recall the conceptual ifference between collapse moels an ecoherence moels. Within collapse moels, one moifies quantum mechanics (by aing appropriate nonlinear an stochastic

10 10 natural to compare the strength of the collapse mechanism (measure by the parameter λ) with that of ecoherence. Such a comparison is given in Table I, when the system uner stuy is a very small particle like an electron, or an almost macroscopic object like a ust particle. We see that, for most sources of ecoherence, the experimentally testable effects of the collapse mechanism are weaker than those prouce by the interaction with the surrouning environment. This implies that, in orer to test such effects, one has to isolate a quantum system for a sufficiently long time from almost all conceivable sources of ecoherence, which is quite ifficult: the experimentally testable ifferences between our collapse moel an stanar quantum mechanics are so small that they cannot be etecte unless very sophisticate experiments are performe, 3. VII. MULTI PARTICLE SYSTEMS: EFFECT OF THE REDUCING TERMS ON THE MACROSCOPIC DYNAMICS The generalization of Eq. (1) to a system of N interacting an istinguishable particles is straightforwar: ψ t ({x}) = i H T t + 1 N λn (q n q n t )Wt n N λ n (q n q n t ) t ψ t ({x}), (86) where H T is the stanar quantum Hamiltonian of the composite system, the operators q n (n = 1,...N) are the position operators of the particles of the system, an W n t (n = 1,...N) are N inepenent stanar Wiener processes; the symbol {x} enotes the N spatial coorinates x 1,...x N. For the purposes of our analysis, it is convenient to switch to the center of mass (R) an relative ( x 1, x,... x N ) coorinates: R = 1 M x n = R + x n ; N m n x n M = N m n, (87) terms) so that macro objects are always localize in space. Decoherence moels, on the other han, are quantum mechanical moels applie to the stuy of open quantum system; since they assume the valiity of the Schröinger equation, they cannot inuce the collapse of the wavefunction of macroscopic systems (as it has been shown, e.g. in 7) even if one of the effects of the interaction with the environment is to hie not to eliminate macroscopic superpositions in measurement like situations. let Q be the position operator for the center of mass an q n (n = 1...N) the position operators associate to the relative coorinates. It is not ifficult to show that uner the assumption H T = H CM + H rel the ynamics for the center of mass an that for the relative motion ecouple; in other wors, ψ t ({x}) = ψt CM (R) ψt rel ({ x}) solves Eq. (86) whenever (R) an ψ rel ({ x}) satisfy the following equations: ψ CM t t ψ rel t ({ x}) = i H rel t + ψ CM t (R) = N λn ( q n q n t )Wt n 1 N λ n ( q n q n t ) t ψt rel ({x}),(88) i H CM t + λ CM (Q Q t )W t λ CM (Q Q t) t λ CM = ψ CM t (R), (89) N λ n = M λ 0. (90) m 0 The first of the above equations escribes the internal motion of the composite system, an will not be analyze in this paper; in the remainer of the section, we will focus our attention on the secon equation. Eq. (89) shows that the reucing terms associate to the center of mass of a composite system are equal to those associate to a particle having mass equal to the total mass M of the composite system; in particular, when the system is isolate i.e., H CM = P /M, where P is the total momentum the center of mass behaves like a free particle, whose ynamics has been alreay analyze in Sects. III, IV an V. In the next subsections we will see that, because of the large mass of a macro object, the ynamics of its center of mass is raically ifferent from that of a microscopic particle. A. The amplification mechanism The first important feature of collapse moels is what has been calle the amplification mechanism 1, : the reuction rates of the constituents of a macro object sum up, so that the reuction rate associate to its center of mass is much greater than the reuction rates of the single constituents. This situation is exemplifie in Fig., which shows the time evolution of the sprea σ q (t) of a Gaussian wavefunction. We note that, however large the initial wavefunction is, after less than 10 sec which correspons to the perception time of a human being its sprea goes below 10 5 cm, which is the threshol chosen in the original GRW moel 1, below which a wavefunction

11 11! FIG. : Time evolution of the sprea σ q(t) of a Gaussian wavefunction of the center of mass of a system containing N = 10 4 nucleons; ifferent initial conitions have been consiere. Time is measure in secons, while the sprea is measure in meters. can be consiere sufficiently well localize to escribe the classical behavior of a macroscopic system. More generally, Eq. (74) implies that: t E A t λ q σq ( ), (91) an, as long as the sprea of the wavefunction is significantly greater than its asymptotic value, i.e. the wavefunction is not alreay sufficiently well localize in space, we have: ( ) ( ) t E A t m q 105 m /sec, (9) Kg m which is a very high reuction rate, for a macroscopic object. Note that, as previously state, the velocity increases, for increasing values of the mass of the particle. Asymptotically, the wavefunction of a macro object has an extremely small sprea; for example: σ q ( ) m σ q ( ) 10 7 m for an 1 g object, for the Earth. Thus, accoring to our collapse moel, macro particles behave like point like particles. B. Damping of fluctuations We have seen that the mean (both in position an in momentum) of the wavefunction unergoes a iffusion process arising from the stochastic ynamics: such a iffusion is quite important at the microscopic level, an it is responsible for the agreement of the physical preictions of the moel with those given by stanar quantum mechanics. We now analyze the magnitue of the fluctuations at the macroscopic level. Contrary to the behavior of the reuction mechanism, which is amplifie when moving from the micro to the macro level, the fluctuations associate to the motion of microscopic particles interfere estructively with each other, in such a way that the iffusion process associate to the center of mass of an N particle system is much weaker than those of the single components. We now give some estimates. Let us suppose that the center of mass wavefunction has reache a stationary solution; uner this assumption, one has from Eqs. (33), (34) an (35): V q t = ω 8λ (ωt) 3 3! + (ωt)! + ωt, (93) V p t = λ t. (94) Since, for example, ω/8λ 10 7 m for a 1 g object, an ω/8λ m for the Earth, we see that for a macro object the numerical values of the parameters are such that for very long times (in many cases much longer that the age of the universe) the fluctuations are so small that, for all practical purposes, they can be neglecte; this is how classical eterminism is recovere within our stochastic moel. The above results imply that the actual values of q t an p t are practically equivalent to their stochastic averages; since these stochastic averages obey the classical laws of motion (31) an (3), we fin out that q t an p t practically evolve accoring to the classical laws of motion, for most realizations of the stochastic process. The conclusion is the following: in the macroscopic regime, the wavefunction of a macroscopic system behaves, for all practical purposes, like a point like particle moving eterministically accoring to Newton laws of motion. VIII. CONCLUSIONS From the analysis of the previous sections we have seen that, in general, the evolution of the wavefunction as preicte by the collapse moel is significantly ifferent from that preicte by stanar quantum mechanics, both at the micro an at the macro level. For example, at the microscopic level the ranom fluctuations can be very large, while in the stanar case there are no fluctuations; at the macroscopic level, wavefunctions rapily localize in space, while in the stanar quantum case they keep spreaing. Anyway, as far as physical preictions are concerne, our moel is almost equivalent to stanar quantum mechanics, the ifferences being so small that they can harly be etecte with present ay technology. Moreover, at the macroscopic level the localization mechanism becomes very rapi an the fluctuations almost isappear: the wavefunction of the center of mass of a macroscopic object behaves like a point like particle moving accoring to Newton s laws.

12 1 To conclue, the stochastic moel reprouces, with excellent accuracy, both quantum mechanics at the microscopic level an classical mechanics at the macroscopic one, an escribes also the transition from the quantum to the classical omain. Acknowlegements We acknowlege very stimulating iscussions with S.L. Aler, D. Dürr, G.C. Ghirari, E. Ippoliti, P. Pearle, D.G.M. Salvetti an B. Vacchini. APPENDIX A: DERIVATION OF INEQUALITY (64) From Eq. (49), one has: g t (Γ R t ) (A1) e λ X t h t Y ΓR t t sin θ t 1 + e ΓR t + h t cosθ t e ΓR t + e ΓR t 1 e ΓR t X t cosθ t. 1 + e ΓR t + h t cosθ t e ΓR t 1 + e ΓR t By using the fact that sinθ t 1 an cosθ t 1, that the function f 1 (x) = x 1 + x + cx x 0, 1 < c 1 (A) is boune between 0 an 1/( + c), while the function f (x) = 1 x 1 + x x 0 (A3) is boune between 1 an 1, we get: g t (Γ R t ) λ h t X 1 h t + X t Y t (A4) t λ h t X t + Y t, 1 h t from which, iviing both the numerator an the enumerator on the right han sie by h t an using (x + y) (x + y ), inequality (64) follows. NOTE (FIRST PUBLISHED IN: A. BASSI, D.G.M. SALVETTI, J. PHYS. A: 40, 9859 (007)) Eqs. (1) an (13) contain a computational mistake. The correct equations are: γ R t = γ I t = λ x t + m ai t + λ t 4 + λ x t ξ t λ x t t m ar t λai t + λ ai t (A5) m k t + 4( ) t x t ξ t λ x t t, (A6) which iffer from Eqs. (1) an (13), in the first case for the extra factor λ/4 an in the secon case for the factor λa I t/4( ). We correct in this way a mistake, which however oes not affect the subsequent analysis. 1 G.C. Ghirari, A. Rimini an T. Weber, Phys. Rev. D 34, 470 (1986). G.C. Ghirari, P. Pearle an A. Rimini, Phys. Rev. A 4, 78 (1990). G.C. Ghirari, R. Grassi an P. Pearle, Foun. Phys. 0, 171 (1990). G.C. Ghirari, R. Grassi an A. Rimini, Phys. Rev. A 4, 1057 (1990). G.C. Ghirari, R. Grassi an F. Benatti, Foun. Phys. 5, 5 (1995). 3 A. Bassi an G.C. Ghirari, Phys. Rept. 379, 57 (003). 4 P. Pearle, Phys. Rev. D 13, 857 (1976). Foun. Phys. 1, 49 (198). Phys. Rev. D 9, 35 (1984). Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 1775 (1984). Phys. Rev. A 39, 77 (1989). 5 L. Diósi, Phys. Lett. A 13, 33 (1988). J. Phys. A 1, 885 (1988). 6 L. Diósi, Phys. Rev. A 40, 1165 (1989). Phys. Rev. A 4, 5086 (1990). 7 V.P. Belavkin, in Lecture Notes in Control an Information Science 11, A. Blaquière e., 45 (1988). 8 V.P. Belavkin an P. Staszewski, Phys. Lett. A 140, 359 (1989); Phys. Rev. A 45, 1347 (199). D. Chruściński an P. Staszewski, Physica Scripta 45, 193 (199). 9 Ph. Blanchar an A. Jabczyk, Phys. Lett. A 175, 157 (1993). Ann. er Physik 4, 583 (1995). Phys. Lett. A 03, 60 (1995). 10 D. Gatarek an N. Gisin, J. Math. Phys. 3, 15 (1991). 11 N. Gisin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 5, 1657 (1984); Helvet. Phys. Acta 6, 363 (1989). N. Gisin an I. Percival, J. Phys. A 5, 5677 (199); J. Phys. A 6, 33 (1993). N. Gisin an M. Rigo, J. Phys. A 8, 7375 (1995). 1 I. Percival, Quantum State Diffusion, Cambrige University Press, Cambrige (1998). 13 L.P. Hughston, Proc. R. Soc. Lonon A 45, 953 (1996). D.C. Broy an L.P. Hughston, Proc. R. Soc. Lonon A 458 (00). 14 S.L. Aler an L.P. Howritz: Journ. Math. Phys. 41, 485 (000). S.L. Aler an T.A. Brun: Journ. Phys. A 34, 4797 (001). S.L. Aler, Journ. Phys. A 35, 841 (00). 15 A. Barchielli, Quantum Opt., 43 (1990). A. Barchielli, Rep. Math. Phys. 33, 1 (1993). 16 A. Barchielli an A.S. Holevo, Stoch. Proc. Appl. 58, 93 (1995). 17 A.S. Holevo, Probab. Theory Relat. Fiels 104, 483

13 13 (1996). 18 G. Da Prato an J. Zabczyk, Stochastic equations in infinite imensions, Cambrige University Press, Cambrige (199). 19 A. Barchielli, in: Contributions in Probability, Uine, Forum (1996). 0 J. Halliwell an A. Zoupas, Phys. Rev. D 5, 794 (1995). 1 R.S. Liptser an A.N. Shiryaev, Statistics of Ranom Processes, Springer, Berlin (001). B. Collett an P. Pearle, Foun. Phys. 33, 1495 (003). 3 A. Bassi, E. Ippoliti an S.L. Aler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, (005). S.L. Aler, A. Bassi an E. Ippoliti, Towars Quantum Superpositions of a Mirror: an Exact Open Systems Analysis Calculational Details, preprint quant ph/ P. F. Hsieh an Y. Sibuya, Basic Theory of Orinary Differential Equations, Springer, Berlin (1999). 5 I.I. Gihman an A.V. Skoroho, Stochastic Differential Equations, Springer Verlag, Berlin (197). 6 A.O. Caleira an A.J. Leggett, Physica 11 A, 587 (1983). E. Joos an H.D. Zeh, Zeit. für Phys B 59, 3 (1985). D. Giulini, E. Joos, C. Kiefer, J. Kupsch, I. O. Stamatescu an H.D. Zeh, Decoherence an the Appearance of a Classical Worl in Quantum Theory, Springer, Berlin (1996). B. Vacchini, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 1374 (000); Phys. Rev. E 63, (001). 7 A. Bassi an G.C. Ghirari, Phys. Lett. A 75, 373 (000).