The quantum mechanical measurement process is analyzed by means of an explicit generic model describing the interaction between object and measuring device. The solution of the Schrödinger equation for the whole system reflects the ‘collapse’ of the object wave function. A necessary condition is a sufficiently sharply peaked initial measurement device wave function, which is guaranteed in its classical limit. With this assumption, it is in particular proven that the off-diagonal elements of the object density matrix vanish. This study therefore (...) shows the reduction of the object state to be a consequence of Hamiltonian evolution of the total system. (shrink)

We investigate in this work the meaning of weak values through the prism of property ascription in quantum systems. Indeed, the weak measurements framework contains only ingredients of the standard quantum formalism, and as such weak measurements are from a technical point of view uncontroversial. However attempting to describe properties of quantum systems through weak values—the output of weak measurements—goes beyond the usual interpretation of quantum mechanics, that relies on eigenvalues. We first recall the usual form of property ascription, based (...) on the eigenstate-eigenvalue link and the existence of “elements of reality”. We then describe against this backdrop the different meanings that have been given to weak values. We finally argue that weak values can be related to a specific form of property ascription, weaker than the eigenvalues case but still relevant to a partial description of a quantum system. (shrink)

In combination with post-selection, weak measurements can lead to surprising results known as anomalous weak values. These lie outside the bounds of the spectrum of the relevant observable, as in the canonical example of measuring the spin of an electron (along some axis) to be 100. We argue that the disturbance caused by the weak measurement, while small, is sufficient to significantly affect the measurement result, and that this is the most reasonable explanation of anomalous weak values.

Despite their important applications in metrology and in spite of numerous experimental demonstrations, weak measurements are still confusing for part of the community. This sometimes leads to unjustified criticism. Recent papers have experimentally clarified the meaning and practical significance of weak measurements, yet in Kastner, Kastner seems to take us many years backwards in the the debate, casting doubt on the very term “weak value” and the meaning of weak measurements. Kastner appears to ignore both the basics and frontiers of (...) weak measurements and misinterprets the weak measurement process and its outcomes. In addition, she accuses the authors of Aharonov et al. in statements completely opposite to the ones they have actually made. There are many points of disagreement between Kastner and us, but in this short reply I will leave aside the ontology and focus mainly on the injustice in her criticism. I shall add some general comments regarding the broader theory of weak measurements and the two-state-vector formalism, as well as supporting experimental results. Finally, I will point out some recent promising results, which can be proven by projective measurements, without the need of employing weak measurements. (shrink)