Quantum anti-Zeno effect

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 61, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 5-

  Lewenstein, M ^a   Rzażewski K ^a,b  

^a LEIBNIZ UNIVERSITY HANNOVER   (Germany)

^b CENTER FOR THEORETICAL PHYSICS   (Poland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85035252150     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.61.022105     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. J. A. Wheeler and W. H. Żurek, Quantum Theory and Measurement (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1983).
2. B. Misra and E.C.G. Sudarshan, J. Math. Phys. 18, 756 (1977).
3. Note, that probability of occupying a certain region of the phase space in classical (chaotic, or mixing) Hamiltonian systems also decays quadratically with time due to the time reversal symmetry. Zeno effect is quantum only in the following sense: in quantum mechanics the detection of whether the system is in the initial state, collapses the system to that state. If we take a classical decaying system, perform measurements, and then perform some operations on the system that at least with some probability put it back into the initial state, we would, of course, have a classical version of the Zeno effect. It is worth noticing that classical error correction schemes are based on this idea, see discussion in the context of quantum correction schemes in computing and information processing 4.
4. P.W. Shor, Phys. Rev. A 52, R2493 (1995);
5. A.M. Steane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 793 (1996);
6. A.M. SteaneProc. R. Soc. London 452, 2551 (1996).
7. J. Schwinger, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 9, 169 (1960);
8. L. Fonda, Rep. Prog. Phys. 41, 587 (1978).
9. R. Cook, Phys. Scr. T21, 49 (1988).
10. W.M. Itano, Phys. Rev. A 41, 2295 (1990).
11. P. Toschek (private communication).
12. P.G. Kwiat, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 4763 (1995);
13. for theoretical foundation see A.C. Velitzur and L. Vaidman, Found. Phys. 23, 987 (1993);
14. for recent references, A.G. White, Phys. Rev. A 58, 605 (1998).
15. V. Frerichs and A. Schenzle, Phys. Rev. A 44, 1962 (1991);
16. see also J. Maddox, Nature (London) 306, 111 (1983);
17. A. Peres, Phys. Rev. D 39, 2943 (1989);
18. P.L. Knight, Nature (London) 344, 493 (1990);
19. for recent works see A. Beige and G.C. Hegerfeldt, Phys. Rev. A 53, 53 (1996);
20. A. Beige and G.C. Hegerfeld, J. Phys. A 30, 1323 (1996).
21. A.G. Kofman and G. Kurizki, Phys. Rev. A 54, R3750 (1996).
22. V. Gontys and B. Kaulakys, Lith. Phys. J. 38, 118 (1998);
23. V. GontysB. Kaulakyse-print quant-ph/980615 (unpublished);
24. V. GontysB. KaulakysPhys. Rev. A 56, 1131 (1997).
25. G. Casati, Phys. Rep. 154, 77 (1987);
26. Phys. Rep.F.M. Izrailev, 196, 229 (1990).
27. (a) K. Rza̧żewski, J. Phys. B 15, L661 (1982);
28. J. Phys. B(b) S.L. Haan and J. Cooper, 17, 3481 (1984).
29. M. Lewenstein, J. Phys. B 21, L9 (1988);
30. M. Lewenstein, Phys. Rev. A 38, 1075 (1988).
31. See, for instance, S.-Y. Zhu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 205 (1997);
32. Phys. Rev. Lett.S. Bay, 79, 2654 (1997);
33. Phys. Rev. Lett.T. Quang, 79, 5238 (1997), and references therein.
34. To obtain an accurate value of the dynamical threshold shift (Formula presented) (see below), non-RWA corrections have to be considered 14.
35. E.P. Wigner, Phys. Rev. 73, 1002 (1948).
36. L.A. Khalfin, Sov. Phys. JETP 6, 1053 (1958).
37. In realistic calculations, this singularity is always regularized; see, for instance, Ref. 15.
38. Such detection employing quantum jumps to a side level in the context of near threshold decay of unstable states was discussed by J. Grochmalicki and M. Lewenstein, Phys. Rev. A 40, 2517 (1989).