Quantum decoherence 185732 225932928 2008-07-16T02:15:59Z Rjwilmsi 203434 gen fixes + link/fix date fields in cite templates (explanation [[User:Rjwilmsi#My_correction_of_citation_templates|here]]) using [[Project:AutoWikiBrowser|AWB]] {{Confusing|date=April 2007}} {{Quantum mechanics|cTopic=Fundamental concepts}} In [[quantum mechanics]], '''quantum decoherence''' is the mechanism by which quantum systems interact with their environments to exhibit probabilistically additive behavior. Quantum decoherence is a feature of [[classical physics]]. Quantum decoherence gives the ''appearance'' of [[wave function collapse]]. Decoherence occurs when a system interacts with its environment in a [[Reversible process (thermodynamics)|thermodynamically irreversible]] way. This prevents different elements in the [[quantum superposition]] of the system+environment's [[wavefunction]] from [[Interference|interfering]] with each other. Decoherence has been a subject of active research for the last two decades [http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0312059]. Decoherence is not ''actual'' [[wave function collapse]]. It only gives the ''appearance'' of wavefunction collapse. The quantum nature of the system is simply "leaked" into the environment. A total superposition of the wavefunction still occurs, but it exists beyond the realm of measurement. Decoherence represents a major problem for the practical realization of [[quantum computer]]s, since these rely heavily on the undisturbed evolution of quantum coherences. ==Mechanisms== Decoherence is not a new theoretical concept, but instead a set of new perspectives in which the environment is no longer ignored in modeling systems. To examine how decoherence operates, an "intuitive" model is presented. The model requires some familiarity with quantum theory basics. Analogies are made between visualisable classical [[phase space]]s and [[Hilbert space]]s. A more rigorous derivation in [[Dirac notation]] shows how decoherence destroys interference effects and the "quantum nature" of systems. Next, the [[density matrix]] approach is presented for perspective. ===Phase space picture=== An N-particle system can be represented in non-relativistic quantum mechanics by a [[wavefunction]], <math>\psi(x_1, x_2, ...,x_N)</math>. This has analogies with the classical [[phase space]]. A classical phase space contains a real-valued function in 6N dimensions (each particle contributes 3 spatial coordinates and 3 momenta). Our "quantum" phase space conversely contains a complex-valued function in a 3N dimensional space. The position and momenta do not [[commute]] but can still inherit much of the mathematical structure of a [[Hilbert space]]. Aside from these differences, however, the analogy holds. Different previously-isolated, non-interacting systems occupy different phase spaces. Alternatively we can say they occupy different, lower-dimensional [[subspace]]s in the phase space of the joint system. The ''effective'' dimensionality of a system's phase space is the number of [[degrees of freedom]] present which—in non-relativistic models—is 3 times the number of a system's ''free'' particles. For a [[macroscopic]] system this will be a very large dimensionality. When two systems (and the environment would be a system) start to interact, though, their associated state vectors are no longer constrained to the subspaces. Instead the combined state vector time-evolves a path through the "larger volume", whose dimensionality is the sum of the dimensions of the two subspaces. A square (2-d surface) extended by just one dimension (a line) forms a cube. The cube has a greater volume, in some sense, than its component square and line axes. The extent two vectors interfere with each other is a measure of how "close" they are to each other (formally, their overlap or [[Hilbert space]] [[scalar product]] together) in the phase space. When a system couples to an external environment, the dimensionality of, and hence "volume" available, to the joint state vector increases enormously. Each environmental [[degree of freedom]] contributes an extra dimension. The original system's wavefunction can be expanded arbitrarily as a sum of elements in a quantum superposition. Each expansion corresponds to a projection of the wave vector onto a basis. The bases can be chosen at will. Let us choose any expansion where the resulting elements interact with the environment in an element-specific way. Such elements will—with overwhelming probability—be rapidly separated from each other by their natural unitary time evolution along their own independent paths. After a very short interaction, there is almost no chance of any further interference. The process is effectively [[Reversible process (thermodynamics)|irreversible]]. The different elements effectively become "lost" from each other in the expanded phase space created by coupling with the environment. The original elements are said to have ''decohered''. The environment has effectively selected out those expansions or decompositions of the original state vector that decohere (or lose phase coherence) with each other. This is called "environmentally-induced-superselection", or [[einselection]].<ref name="zurek03">[[Wojciech H. Zurek]], Decoherence, [[einselection]], and the quantum origins of the classical, ''Reviews of Modern Physics'' 2003, 75, 715 or [http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0105127]</ref> The decohered elements of the system no longer exhibit quantum [[interference]] between each other, as in a [[double-slit experiment]]. Any elements that decohere from each other via environmental interactions are said to be [[quantum entanglement|quantum entangled]] with the environment. The converse is not true: not all entangled states are decohered from each other. Any measuring device or apparatus acts as an environment since, at some stage along the measuring chain, it has to be large enough to be read by humans. It must possess a very large number of hidden degrees of freedom. In effect, the interactions may be considered to be [[Measurement in quantum mechanics|quantum measurements]]. As a result of an interaction, the wave functions of the system and the measuring device become [[Quantum entanglement|entangled]] with each other. Decoherence happens when different portions of the system's wavefunction become entangled in different ways with the measuring device. For two einselected elements of the entangled system's state to interfere, both the original system and the measuring in both elements device must significantly overlap, in the [[scalar product]] sense. If the measuring device has many degrees of freedom, it is ''very'' unlikely for this to happen. As a consequence, the system behaves as a classical [[statistical ensemble]] of the different elements rather than as a single coherent [[quantum superposition]] of them. From the perspective of each ensemble member's measuring device, the system appears to have [[Reversible process (thermodynamics)|irreversibly]] [[Wavefunction collapse|collapsed]] onto a state with a precise value for the measured attributes, relative to that element. ===Dirac notation=== Using the [[Dirac notation]], let the system initially be in the state <math> |\psi \rang</math> where :<math> |\psi \rang = \sum_i |i\rang \lang i|\psi \rang </math> where the <math> |i\rang</math>s form an [[Einselection|einselected]] [[eigen basis|basis]] ('''e'''nvironmentally '''in'''duced '''selected''' eigen basis<ref name="zurek03"/>); and let the environment initially be in the state <math>|\epsilon\rang</math>. The [[vector basis]] of the total combined system and environment can be formed by [[tensor product|tensor multiplying]] the basis vectors of the subsystems together. Thus, before any interaction between the two subsystems, the joint state can be written as: :<math>|\mathit{before}\rang = \sum_i |i\rang |\epsilon \rang \lang i|\psi \rang. </math> There are two extremes in the way the system can interact with its environment: either (1) the system loses its distinct identity and merges with the environment (e.g. photons in a cold, dark cavity get converted into molecular excitations within the cavity walls), or (2) the system is not disturbed at all, even though the environment is disturbed (e.g. the idealized non-disturbing measurement). In general an interaction is a mixture of these two extremes, which we shall examine: ====System absorbed by environment==== If the environment absorbs the system, each element of the total system's basis interacts with the environment such that: :<math> |i \rang |\epsilon\rang </math> evolves into <math> |\epsilon_i\rang</math> and so :<math>|\mathit{before}\rang </math> evolves into <font style="vertical-align:-25%;"><math> |\mathit{after}\rang = \sum_i |\epsilon_i\rang \lang i|\psi \rang</math></font> where the [[unitarity]] of time-evolution demands that the total state basis remains [[orthonormal]] and in particular their [[scalar product|scalar]] or [[inner product]]s with each other vanish, since <math>\lang i|j\rang = \delta_{ij}</math>: :<math>\lang \epsilon_i|\epsilon_j\rang = \delta_{ij}</math> This orthonormality of the environment states is the defining characteristic required for [[einselection]].<ref name="zurek03"/> ====System not disturbed by environment==== This is the idealised measurement/undisturbed system case in which each element of the basis interacts with the environment such that: :<math>|i\rang |\epsilon \rang </math> evolves into the product <math> |i,\epsilon_i\rang = |i \rang|\epsilon_i\rang </math> i.e. the system disturbs the environment, but is itself ''undisturbed'' by the environment. and so: :<math>|\mathit{before}\rang </math> evolves into <font style="vertical-align:-25%;"><math>|\mathit{after}\rang = \sum_i |i,\epsilon_i\rang \lang i|\psi \rang</math></font> where, again, [[unitarity]] demands that: :<math>\lang i,\epsilon_i|j,\epsilon_j\rang = \lang i|j \rang \lang \epsilon_i|\epsilon_j\rang= \delta_{ij} \lang \epsilon_i|\epsilon_j\rang = \delta_{ij}</math> and ''additionally'' decoherence requires, by virtue of the large number of hidden degrees of freedom in the environment, that :<math>\lang \epsilon_i|\epsilon_j\rang \approx \delta_{ij}</math> As before, this is the defining characteristic for decoherence to become [[einselection]].<ref name="zurek03"/> The approximation becomes more exact as the number of environmental degrees of freedom affected increases. Note that if the system basis <math>|i\rang</math> were not an einselected basis then the last condition is trivial since the disturbed environment is not a function of <math>i</math> and we have the trivial disturbed environment basis <math>|\epsilon_j\rang = |\epsilon'\rang </math>. This would correspond to the system basis being degenerate with respect to the environmentally-defined-measurement-observable. For a complex environmental interaction (which would be expected for a typical macroscale interaction) a non-einselected basis would be hard to define. ===Loss of interference and the transition from quantum to classical=== The utility of decoherence lies in its application to the analysis of probabilities, before and after environmental interaction, and in particular to the vanishing of [[quantum interference]] terms after decoherence has occurred. If we ask what is the probability of observing the system making a transition or [[quantum leap]] from <math>\psi</math> to <math>\phi</math> '''before''' <math>\psi</math> has interacted with its environment, then application of the [[Born probability]] rule states that the transition probability is the modulus squared of the scalar product of the two states: :<math>\mathit{prob}_{\mathit{before}}(\psi \rightarrow \phi) = |\lang \psi |\phi \rang|^2 = |\sum_i\psi^*_i \phi_i |^2 = \sum_{i} |\psi_i^*\phi_i|^2 + \sum_{ij;i \ne j} \psi^*_i \psi_j \phi^*_j\phi_i</math> where <math> \psi_i = \lang i|\psi \rang , \psi_i^* = \lang \psi|i \rang </math> and <math> \phi_i = \lang i|\phi \rang </math> etc Terms appear in the expansion of the transition probability above which involve <math>i \ne j</math>; these can be thought of as representing ''interference'' between the different basis elements or quantum alternatives. This is a purely quantum effect and represents the non-additivity of the probabilities of quantum alternatives. To calculate the probability of observing the system making a quantum leap from <math>\psi</math> to <math>\phi</math> '''after''' <math>\psi</math> has interacted with its environment, then application of the [[Born probability]] rule states we must sum over all the relevant possible states of the environment, <math>E_i</math>, ''before'' squaring the modulus: :<math>\mathit{prob}_{\mathit{after}}(\psi \rightarrow \phi) = \sum_j|\lang \mathit{after}| \phi, \epsilon_j \rang|^2 = \sum_j|\sum_i \psi_i^* \lang i, \epsilon_i|\phi, \epsilon_j\rang |^2 = \sum_j|\sum_i \psi_i^* \lang i|\phi \rang \lang \epsilon_i|\epsilon_j \rang |^2</math> The internal summation vanishes when we apply the decoherence / [[einselection]] condition <math>\lang \epsilon_i|\epsilon_j\rang \approx \delta_{ij}</math> and the formula simplifies to: :<math>\mathit{prob}_{\mathit{after}}(\psi \rightarrow \phi) \approx \sum_j|\psi_j^* \lang j|\phi\rang |^2 = \sum_i|\psi^*_i \phi_i |^2</math> If we compare this with the formula we derived before the environment introduced decoherence we can see that the effect of decoherence has been to move the summation sign <math>\Sigma_i</math> from inside of the modulus sign to outside. As a result all the cross- or [[quantum interference]]-terms: :<math> \sum_{ij;i \ne j} \psi^*_i \psi_j \phi^*_j\phi_i</math> have vanished from the transition probability calculation. The decoherence has [[Reversible process (thermodynamics)|irreversibly]] converted quantum behaviour (additive [[probability amplitude]]s) to classical behaviour (additive probabilities).<ref name="zurek91">[[Wojciech H. Zurek]], Decoherence and the transition from quantum to classical, ''Physics Today'', 44, pp 36–44 (1991)</ref><ref name="zurek03" /> In terms of density matrices, the loss of interference effects corresponds to the diagonalization of the "environmentally traced over" [[density matrix]].<ref name="zurek03"/> ===Density matrix approach=== The effect of decoherence on [[density matrix|density matrices]] is essentially the decay or rapid vanishing of the off-diagonal elements of the [[partial trace]] of the joint system's [[density matrix]], i.e. the [[trace]], with respect to ''any'' environmental basis, of the density matrix of the combined system ''and'' its environment. The decoherence [[Reversible process (thermodynamics)|irreversibly]] converts the "averaged" or "environmentally traced over"<ref name="zurek03"/> density matrix from a pure state to a reduced mixture; it is this that gives the ''appearance'' of [[wavefunction collapse]]. Again this is called "environmentally-induced-superselection", or [[einselection]].<ref name="zurek03"/> The advantage of taking the partial trace is that this procedure is indifferent to the environmental basis chosen. == Timescales == Decoherence represents an extremely fast process for macroscopic objects, since these are interacting with many microscopic objects, with an enormous number of degrees of freedom, in their natural environment. The process explains why we tend not to observe quantum behaviour in everyday macroscopic objects. It also explains why we do see classical fields emerge from the properties of the interaction between matter and radiation for large amounts of matter. The time taken for off-diagonal components of the density matrix to effectively vanish is called the '''decoherence time''', and is typically extremely short for everyday, macroscale process. == Measurement == The discontinuous "wave function collapse" postulated in the [[Copenhagen interpretation]] to enable the theory to be related to the results of laboratory measurements now can be understood as an aspect of the normal dynamics of quantum mechanics via the decoherence process. Consequently, decoherence is an important part of the modern alternative to the Copenhagen interpretation, based on [[consistent histories]]. Decoherence shows how a macroscopic system interacting with a lot of microscopic systems (e.g. collisions with air molecules or photons) moves from being in a pure quantum state—which in general will be a coherent superposition (see [[Schrödinger's cat]])—to being in an incoherent mixture of these states. The weighting of each outcome in the mixture in case of measurement is exactly that which gives the probabilities of the different results of such a measurement. However, decoherence by itself may not give a complete solution of the [[measurement problem]], since all components of the wave function still exist in a global [[superposition]], which is explicitly acknowledged in the [[many-worlds interpretation]]. All decoherence explains, in this view, is why these coherences are no longer available for inspection by local observers. To present a solution to the measurement problem in most [[Interpretation of quantum mechanics|interpretations of quantum mechanics]], decoherence must be supplied with some nontrivial interpretational considerations (as for example [[Wojciech H. Zurek|Wojciech Zurek]] tends to do in his ''Existential interpretation''). However, according to [[Hugh Everett|Everett]] and [[Bryce DeWitt|DeWitt]] the [[many-worlds interpretation]] can be derived from the formalism alone, in which case no extra interpretational layer is required. == Mathematical details == We assume for the moment the system in question consists of a subsystem being studied, A and the "environment" <math>\epsilon</math>, and the total [[Hilbert space]] is the [[tensor product]] of a Hilbert space describing A, H<sub>A</sub> and a Hilbert space describing E, <math>H_\epsilon</math>: that is, :<math>H=H_A\otimes H_\epsilon</math>. This is a reasonably good approximation in the case where A and <math>\epsilon</math> are relatively independent (e.g. there is nothing like parts of A mixing with parts of <math>\epsilon</math> or vice versa). The point is, the interaction with the environment is for all practical purposes unavoidable (e.g. even a single excited atom in a vacuum would emit a photon which would then go off). Let's say this interaction is described by a [[unitary transformation]] U acting upon H. Assume the initial state of the environment is <math>|\mathrm{in}\rangle</math> and the initial state of A is the superposition state :<math> c_1 | \psi_1 \rangle + c_2|\psi_2\rangle </math> where <math>|\psi_1 \rangle</math> and <math>|\psi_2 \rangle</math> are orthogonal and there is no [[Quantum entanglement|entanglement]] initially. Also, choose an orthonormal basis for H<sub>A</sub>, <math> \{ |e_i\rangle \}_i</math>. (This could be a "continuously indexed basis" or a mixture of continuous and discrete indexes, in which case we would have to use a [[rigged Hilbert space]] and be more careful about what we mean by orthonormal but that's an inessential detail for expository purposes.) Then, we can expand :<math>U(|\psi_1\rangle\otimes|\mathrm{in}\rangle)</math> and :<math>U(|\psi_2\rangle\otimes|\mathrm{in}\rangle)</math> uniquely as :<math>\sum_i |e_i\rangle\otimes|f_{1i}\rangle</math> and :<math>\sum_i |e_i\rangle\otimes|f_{2i}\rangle</math> respectively. One thing to realize is that the environment contains a huge number of degrees of freedom, a good number of them interacting with each other all the time. This makes the following assumption reasonable in a handwaving way, which can be shown to be true in some simple toy models. Assume that there exists a basis for <math>H_\epsilon</math> such that <math>|f_{1i}\rangle</math> and <math>|f_{1j}\rangle</math> are all approximately orthogonal to a good degree if i is not j and the same thing for <math>|f_{2i}\rangle</math> and <math>|f_{2j}\rangle</math> and also <math>|f_{1i}\rangle</math> and <math>|f_{2j}\rangle</math> for any i and j (the decoherence property). This often turns out to be true (as a reasonable conjecture) in the position basis because how A interacts with the environment would often depend critically upon the position of the objects in A. Then, if we take the [[partial trace]] over the environment, we'd find the density state is approximately described by :<math>\sum_i (\langle f_{1i}|f_{1i}\rangle+\langle f_{2i}|f_{2i}\rangle)|e_i\rangle\langle e_i|</math> (i.e. we have a diagonal [[mixed state]] and there is no constructive or destructive interference and the "probabilities" add up classically). The time it takes for U(t) (the unitary operator as a function of time) to display the decoherence property is called the '''decoherence time'''. ==Experimental observation== The collapse of a quantum superposition into a single definite state was quantitatively measured for the first time by [[Serge Haroche]] and his co-workers at the [[École Normale Supérieure]] in [[Paris]] in 1996 [http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v77/i24/p4887_1]. Their approach involved sending individual rubidium atoms, each in a superposition of two states, through a microwave-filled cavity. The two quantum states both cause shifts in the phase of the microwave field, but by different amounts, so that the field itself is also put into a superposition of two states. As the cavity field exchanges energy with its surroundings, however, its superposition appears to collapse into a single definite state. Haroche and his colleagues measured the resulting decoherence via correlations between the energy levels of pairs of atoms sent through the cavity with various time delays between the atoms. ==In interpretations of quantum mechanics== Before an understanding of decoherence was developed the [[Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics]] treated [[wavefunction collapse]] as a fundamental, ''a priori'' process. Decoherence provides an ''explanatory mechanism'' for the appearance of [[wavefunction collapse]] and was first developed by [[David Bohm]] in 1952 who applied it to [[Louis DeBroglie]]'s [[pilot wave]] theory, producing [[Bohmian mechanics]]<ref name="bohm52a">[[David Bohm]], A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of "Hidden Variables", I, ''Physical Review'', (1952), 84, pp 166–179</ref><ref name="bohm52b">[[David Bohm]], A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of "Hidden Variables", II, ''Physical Review'', (1952), 85, pp 180–193</ref>, the first successful hidden variables interpretation of quantum mechanics. Decoherence was then used by [[Hugh Everett]] in 1957 to form the core of his [[many-worlds interpretation]]<ref name=everett57>[[Hugh Everett]], Relative State Formulation of Quantum Mechanics, ''Reviews of Modern Physics'' vol 29, (1957) pp 454–462.</ref> . However decoherence was largely<ref name=zeh>[[H. Dieter Zeh]], On the Interpretation of Measurement in Quantum Theory, ''Foundation of Physics'', vol. 1, pp. 69-76, (1970).</ref> ignored for many years, and not until the 1980s <ref name="zurek81">[[Wojciech H. Zurek]], Pointer Basis of Quantum Apparatus: Into what Mixture does the Wave Packet Collapse?, ''Physical Review D'', 24, pp. 1516–1525 (1981)</ref> <ref name="zurek82">[[Wojciech H. Zurek]], Environment-Induced Superselection Rules, ''Physical Review D'', 26, pp.1862–1880, (1982)</ref>/90s did decoherent-based explanations of the appearance of wavefunction collapse become popular, with the greater acceptance of the use of reduced [[density matrix|density matrices]]<ref name="zurek91" />. The range of decoherent interpretations have subsequently been extended around the idea, such as [[consistent histories]]. Some versions of the Copenhagen Interpretation have been rebranded to include decoherence. Decoherence does not provide a mechanism for the actual wave function collapse; rather it provides a mechanism for the appearance of wavefunction collapse. The quantum nature of the system is simply "leaked" into the environment so that a total superposition of the wavefunction still exists, but exists &mdash; at least for all practical purposes<ref>[[Roger Penrose]] ''[[The Road to Reality]]'', p 802-803. "...the environmental-decoherence viewpoint..maintains that state vector reduction [the R process ] can be understood as coming about because the environmental system under consideration becomes inextricably entangled with its environment.[...] We think of the environment as extremely complicated and essentially 'random' [..], accordingly we sum over the unknown states in the environment to obtain a density matrix[...] Under normal circumstances, one must regard the density matrix as as some kind of approximation to the whole quantum truth. For there is no general principle providing an absolute bar to extracting information from the environment.[...] Accordingly, such descriptions are referred to as FAPP [For All Practical Purposes]" </ref> &mdash; beyond the realm of measurement. Thus decoherence, as a philosophical interpretation, amounts to something similar to the many-worlds approach.<ref> [[Huw Price]], ''Times' Arrow and Archimedes' Point'' p 226. 'There is a world of difference between saying "the environment explains why collapse happens where it does" and saying "the environment explains why collapse seems to happen even though it doesn't really happen'.</ref> ==See also== *[[Einselection]] *[[Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics]] *[[Partial trace]] *[[Quantum entanglement]] *[[Quantum superposition]] *[[H. Dieter Zeh]] *[[Wojciech Zurek]] *[[Quantum darwinism]] *[[Zeno effect]] ==References== <References/> ==Further reading== * {{cite book | first = Maximilian | last = Schlosshauer | year = 2007 | title = Decoherence and the Quantum-to-Classical Transition | edition = 1st edition | location = Berlin/Heidelberg | publisher = Springer }} * {{cite book | first = E. | last = Joos | coauthors = et al. | year = 2003 | title = Decoherence and the Appearance of a Classical World in Quantum Theory | edition = 2nd edition | location = Berlin | publisher = Springer }} * {{cite book | first = R. | last = Omnes | year = 1999 | title = Understanding Quantum Mechanics | location = Princeton | publisher = Princeton University Press }} * [[Wojciech H. Zurek|Zurek, Wojciech H.]] (2003). "Decoherence and the transition from quantum to classical — REVISITED", {{arxiv|archive=quant-ph|id=0306072}} (An updated version of PHYSICS TODAY, 44:36–44 (1991) article) * {{cite journal | first = Maximilian | last = Schlosshauer | date = [[23 February]] [[2005]] | title = "Decoherence, the Measurement Problem, and Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics" | journal = Reviews of Modern Physics | volume=76(2004) | pages = 1267–1305 | id= {{arxiv|archive=quant-ph|id=0312059}}, {{doi|10.1103/RevModPhys.76.1267}} | doi = 10.1103/RevModPhys.76.1267}} | doi_brokendate = 2008-06-28 }} * J.J. Halliwell, J. Perez-Mercader, [[Wojciech H. Zurek]], eds, ''The Physical Origins of Time Asymmetry'', Part 3: Decoherence, ISBN 0-521-56837-4 *[[Berthold-Georg Englert]], [[Marlan O. Scully]] & [[Herbert Walther]], ''Quantum Optical Tests of Complementarity'' , Nature, Vol 351, pp 111–116 (9 May 1991) and (same authors) ''The Duality in Matter and Light'' Scientific American, pg 56–61, (December 1994). Demonstrates that [[Complementarity (physics)|complementarity]] is enforced, and [[Interference|quantum interference]] effects destroyed, by [[Irreversibility|irreversible]] [[Measurement in quantum mechanics|object-apparatus correlations]], and not, as was previously popularly believed, by Heisenberg's [[uncertainty principle]] itself. ==Additional external links== * [http://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_decoherence.asp A very lucid description of decoherence] * http://www.decoherence.info * http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-decoherence/ * [http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0312059 Decoherence, the measurement problem, and interpretations of quantum mechanics] * [http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0505070 Measurements and Decoherence] * [http://www.physics.drexel.edu/~tim/Decoherence A Detailed introduction (graduate student project)] * [http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa004&articleID=000D4372-A8A9-1330-A54583414B7F0000 Quantum Bug : Qubits might spontaneously decay in seconds] Scientific American Magazine (October 2005) [[Category:Quantum measurement]] [[de:Dekohärenz]] [[es:Decoherencia cuántica]] [[fr:Décohérence quantique]] [[it:Decoerenza quantistica]] [[he:דה-קוהרנטיות קוונטית]] [[lt:Dekoherencija]] [[ja:量子デコヒーレンス]] [[pl:Dekoherencja kwantowa]] [[fi:Dekoherenssi]] [[zh:量子脫散]]