Equation 3 · Decoherence: The Quiet Selection That Makes the World Look Solid
What does this equation mean?
Read the formula alongside the article passage below. Each part has a deeper page with its role in the equation, the supporting passage and nearby citations.
This equation states an equality: the expressions on both sides have the same value under the article’s assumptions. Read the equation part by part below; each part has a contextual explanation and a link to its mathematical background.
Read it piece by piece
Symbol ρ
ρ is part of the quantity the equation computes from the expression on the right.
Symbol x
x is an argument of the function-like quantity on the left; its role is set by that function’s stated inputs.
Symbol t
t is an argument of the function-like quantity on the left; its role is set by that function’s stated inputs.
=
The expressions on both sides represent the same quantity under the stated assumptions.
See an illustrated explanation →subtraction
Subtract the following term or group from the preceding one. A leading minus marks a negative quantity.
superscript
A raised number can be a power. When it is a label or bound, it selects a case or the upper limit of a sum; the formula’s structure distinguishes these uses.
See an illustrated explanation →How to interpret it
Read it with the definitions, units, and assumptions supplied by the article.
What the article says around this equation
Joos and Zeh made this quantitative in 1985 by deriving a genuine, non-phenomenological master equation for the reduced density matrix of an object’s centre-of-mass position under repeated recoil-free scattering [ 7 ] . For the off-diagonal elements of that density matrix — the very quantity whose survival or destruction is the entire question of macroscopic superposition — their result, in the short-time, many-collisions regime, takes the form of a simple exponential decay in the separation between the two positions being superposed: . Here is what Joos and Zeh call the localization rate: a single number, with units of inverse length squared per unit time, built…
Read the full surrounding passage
Joos and Zeh made this quantitative in 1985 by deriving a genuine, non-phenomenological master equation for the reduced density matrix of an object’s centre-of-mass position under repeated recoil-free scattering [ 7 ] . For the off-diagonal elements of that density matrix — the very quantity whose survival or destruction is the entire question of macroscopic superposition — their result, in the short-time, many-collisions regime, takes the form of a simple exponential decay in the separation between the two positions being superposed: . Here is what Joos and Zeh call the localization rate: a single number, with units of inverse length squared per unit time, built from the scattering cross-section of the object, the flux and momentum of whatever is doing the scattering, and nothing else [ 7 ] . Everything about how fast a given superposition dies is contained in , and is a number you can actually compute for a real object in a real environment — which is exactly what Joos and Zeh went on to do, in the paper’s Table 2, for three sizes of hypothetical “dust particle”: a large grain of radius 10^{-3} centimetres, a small grain of 10^{-5} centimetres, and a body of 10^{-6} centimetres that the paper itself labels a “large molecule” [ 7 ] :
Sources cited in the surrounding passage
These citations give research context. Read each source to check which claims it supports.
Return to Decoherence: The Quiet Selection That Makes the World Look Solid