Skip to content

A spin measurement is a measurement of a chosen spin component. For spin-1/21/2, measuring along a unit axis n^\hat{\mathbf n} means measuring

Sn^=n^⋅S=ℏ2n^⋅σ.S_{\hat n} = \hat{\mathbf n}\cdot\mathbf S = \frac{\hbar}{2}\hat{\mathbf n}\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma.

The possible outcomes are

±ℏ2.\pm\frac{\hbar}{2}.

The axis is part of the measurement specification. The invariant S2S^2 has the fixed value 3ℏ2/43\hbar^2/4, but it does not specify a spin projection. To predict the two outcomes ±ℏ/2\pm\hbar/2, one must name the measured component, such as SzS_z, SxS_x, or Sn^S_{\hat n}.

This page applies the projective measurement formalism to spin. The physical Stern–Gerlach analyzer model is treated in Stern–Gerlach Revisited, and the general measurement rules are treated in Projective Measurement.

In the standard SzS_z basis,

∣↑⟩=∣+z⟩,∣↓⟩=∣−z⟩,\lvert\uparrow\rangle=\lvert+z\rangle, \qquad \lvert\downarrow\rangle=\lvert-z\rangle,

with

Sz∣↑⟩=ℏ2∣↑⟩,Sz∣↓⟩=−ℏ2∣↓⟩.S_z\lvert\uparrow\rangle = \frac{\hbar}{2}\lvert\uparrow\rangle, \qquad S_z\lvert\downarrow\rangle = -\frac{\hbar}{2}\lvert\downarrow\rangle.

The corresponding projectors are

P+z=∣↑⟩⟨↑∣=12(I+σz),P_{+z} = \lvert\uparrow\rangle\langle\uparrow\rvert = \frac12(I+\sigma_z),

and

P−z=∣↓⟩⟨↓∣=12(I−σz).P_{-z} = \lvert\downarrow\rangle\langle\downarrow\rvert = \frac12(I-\sigma_z).

For a normalized state

∣ψ⟩=α∣↑⟩+β∣↓⟩,\lvert\psi\rangle = \alpha\lvert\uparrow\rangle +\beta\lvert\downarrow\rangle,

the Born probabilities are

p(+z)=∣α∣2,p(−z)=∣β∣2.p(+z)=\lvert\alpha\rvert^2, \qquad p(-z)=\lvert\beta\rvert^2.

These probabilities describe the specified measurement. The formula alone neither assigns pre-existing values to all spin components nor rules out every hidden-variable model; such claims require additional assumptions and experiments.

Let

n^=(sin⁡θcos⁡ϕ,sin⁡θsin⁡ϕ,cos⁡θ)\hat{\mathbf n} = (\sin\theta\cos\phi,\sin\theta\sin\phi,\cos\theta)

be a unit vector. The spin component along n^\hat{\mathbf n} is

Sn^=ℏ2n^⋅σ.S_{\hat n} = \frac{\hbar}{2}\hat{\mathbf n}\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma.

Because

(n^⋅σ)2=I,(\hat{\mathbf n}\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma)^2=I,

the eigenvalues of n^⋅σ\hat{\mathbf n}\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma are ±1\pm1, and the eigenvalues of Sn^S_{\hat n} are ±ℏ/2\pm\hbar/2.

The projectors are

P±(n^)=12(I±n^⋅σ).P_\pm^{(\hat n)} = \frac12 \left( I\pm\hat{\mathbf n}\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma \right).

They obey the projective-measurement identities

P+(n^)+P−(n^)=I,P_+^{(\hat n)}+P_-^{(\hat n)}=I, P±(n^)P±(n^)=P±(n^),P_\pm^{(\hat n)}P_\pm^{(\hat n)} = P_\pm^{(\hat n)},

and

P+(n^)P−(n^)=0.P_+^{(\hat n)}P_-^{(\hat n)}=0.

Thus {P+(n^),P−(n^)}\{P_+^{(\hat n)},P_-^{(\hat n)}\} is the two-outcome projective measurement associated with the spin component Sn^S_{\hat n}.

For a pure state ∣ψ⟩\lvert\psi\rangle, the probability of outcome ±\pm along n^\hat{\mathbf n} is

p±=⟨ψ∣P±(n^)∣ψ⟩.p_\pm = \langle\psi|P_\pm^{(\hat n)}|\psi\rangle.

If the state is the +a^+\hat{\mathbf a} eigenstate, where γ\gamma is the angle between a^\hat{\mathbf a} and n^\hat{\mathbf n}, then

p+=12(1+a^⋅n^)=cos⁡2γ2,p_+ = \frac12 \left( 1+\hat{\mathbf a}\cdot\hat{\mathbf n} \right) = \cos^2\frac{\gamma}{2},

and

p−=sin⁡2γ2.p_- = \sin^2\frac{\gamma}{2}.

For example, ∣+z⟩|+z\rangle measured along xx has γ=π/2\gamma=\pi/2, so both outcomes have probability 1/21/2.

For a spin-1/21/2 density operator,

ρ=12(I+r⋅σ),\rho = \frac12 \left( I+\mathbf r\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma \right),

where ∣r∣≤1\lvert\mathbf r\rvert\leq1, the measurement probabilities are

p±=Tr⁡(ρP±(n^))=12(1±r⋅n^).p_\pm = \operatorname{Tr} \left( \rho P_\pm^{(\hat n)} \right) = \frac12 \left( 1\pm\mathbf r\cdot\hat{\mathbf n} \right).

This is the compact Bloch-sphere form of the Born rule. The component of the Bloch vector along the analyzer axis controls the bias; transverse components affect other axes but not this outcome probability directly.

The expectation value is

⟨Sn^⟩=ℏ2r⋅n^.\langle S_{\hat n}\rangle = \frac{\hbar}{2}\mathbf r\cdot\hat{\mathbf n}.

Thus a state can have zero expectation value along an axis while still giving two possible outcomes ±ℏ/2\pm\hbar/2.

If the outcome ++ along n^\hat{\mathbf n} occurs in an ideal selective projective measurement, a pure state updates as

∣ψ⟩⟶P+(n^)∣ψ⟩p+.\lvert\psi\rangle \longrightarrow \frac{ P_+^{(\hat n)}\lvert\psi\rangle }{ \sqrt{p_+} }.

Similarly, outcome −- gives

∣ψ⟩⟶P−(n^)∣ψ⟩p−.\lvert\psi\rangle \longrightarrow \frac{ P_-^{(\hat n)}\lvert\psi\rangle }{ \sqrt{p_-} }.

For density operators, the update is

ρ⟶P±(n^)ρP±(n^)Tr⁡(ρP±(n^)).\rho \longrightarrow \frac{ P_\pm^{(\hat n)}\rho P_\pm^{(\hat n)} }{ \operatorname{Tr} \left( \rho P_\pm^{(\hat n)} \right) }.

These conditional formulas apply only when the outcome has nonzero probability. They describe the ideal repeatable (Lüders) measurement; a device with the same outcome probabilities can apply an additional transformation afterward. This is a conditional state assignment after a specified outcome. It is not a full microscopic model of a detector.

If this ideal measurement is performed but its recorded outcome is disregarded, the nonselective update is

ρ⟶P+(n^)ρP+(n^)+P−(n^)ρP−(n^).\rho \longrightarrow P_+^{(\hat n)}\rho P_+^{(\hat n)} + P_-^{(\hat n)}\rho P_-^{(\hat n)}.

In Bloch-vector language, this keeps only the component of r\mathbf r along n^\hat{\mathbf n}:

r⟶(r⋅n^)n^.\mathbf r \longrightarrow (\mathbf r\cdot\hat{\mathbf n})\hat{\mathbf n}.

The measurement removes coherence between the two eigenspaces of Sn^S_{\hat n}.

Spin measurements along different axes are generally incompatible. For two unit vectors a^\hat{\mathbf a} and b^\hat{\mathbf b},

[Sa^,Sb^]=iℏSa^×b^.[S_{\hat a},S_{\hat b}] = i\hbar S_{\hat{\mathbf a}\times\hat{\mathbf b}}.

Here Sv=v⋅SS_{\mathbf v}=\mathbf v\cdot\mathbf S also denotes a nonunit vector v\mathbf v; the cross product has length sin⁡γ\sin\gamma. If the axes are neither parallel nor antiparallel, the spin-1/21/2 commutator is nonzero. A state prepared with definite SzS_z is therefore not generally definite in SxS_x.

For spin-1/21/2,

∣+z⟩=12(∣+x⟩+∣−x⟩).\lvert+z\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt2} \left( \lvert+x\rangle+\lvert-x\rangle \right).

An xx measurement of a +z+z state gives equal probabilities. If one outcome is selected, the post-measurement state is an xx eigenstate, and a later zz measurement again has equal probabilities. This is the spin version of the general Sequential Measurements rule.

Repeated measurement along the same axis is deterministic in the ideal projective model. If a measurement of Sn^S_{\hat n} gives ++ and is immediately repeated, the second measurement gives ++ with probability 11 because the state has been updated into the +n^+\hat{\mathbf n} eigenspace.

Changing the axis changes the measurement. A useful three-step example is:

  1. prepare ∣+z⟩|+z\rangle;
  2. measure SxS_x and select +x+x;
  3. measure SzS_z again.

The final SzS_z measurement gives

p(+z)=p(−z)=12.p(+z)=p(-z)=\frac12.

The intermediate SxS_x selection prepares a new state. It does not merely reveal a value while leaving the original SzS_z certainty intact.

An ideal Stern–Gerlach analyzer oriented along n^\hat{\mathbf n} is the standard physical picture for the measurement {P+(n^),P−(n^)}\{P_+^{(\hat n)},P_-^{(\hat n)}\}. The apparatus correlates the two spin projectors with two spatial output paths.

For how magnetic forces separate the output paths, and where the ideal measurement approximation enters, see Stern–Gerlach Revisited.

  • Saying “measure spin” without specifying the axis.
  • Using ∣α∣2|\alpha|^2 and ∣β∣2|\beta|^2 for every axis instead of only the chosen basis.
  • Forgetting that P±(n^)P_\pm^{(\hat n)} changes when the analyzer axis changes.
  • Treating the post-measurement state as the same as the pre-measurement state after a selective outcome.
  • Assuming that definite SzS_z implies definite SxS_x.
  • Confusing expectation value ⟨Sn^⟩\langle S_{\hat n}\rangle with a single-shot outcome.
  • Treating the projective update rule as a complete physical detector model.
  1. A state is ∣ψ⟩=(∣↑⟩+i∣↓⟩)/2\lvert\psi\rangle=(\lvert\uparrow\rangle+i\lvert\downarrow\rangle)/\sqrt2. Find the probabilities for an SzS_z measurement.
Solution

In the SzS_z basis,

α=12,β=i2.\alpha=\frac{1}{\sqrt2}, \qquad \beta=\frac{i}{\sqrt2}.

Therefore

p(+z)=∣α∣2=12,p(−z)=∣β∣2=12.p(+z)=\lvert\alpha\rvert^2=\frac12, \qquad p(-z)=\lvert\beta\rvert^2=\frac12.
  1. A spin starts in ∣+z⟩|+z\rangle. It is measured along an axis n^\hat{\mathbf n} making angle θ\theta with zz, and the outcome is discarded. Find the probability of +z+z in a final measurement.
Solution

Initially r=z^\mathbf r=\hat{\mathbf z}. The nonselective intermediate measurement gives r′=cos⁡θ n^\mathbf r'=\cos\theta\,\hat{\mathbf n}, so

P(+z)=1+r′⋅z^2=1+cos⁡2θ2.P(+z)=\frac{1+\mathbf r'\cdot\hat{\mathbf z}}{2} =\frac{1+\cos^2\theta}{2}.

It is one for parallel or antiparallel analyzer axes and 1/21/2 for a perpendicular axis. Discarding the outcome does not undo the measurement disturbance.

  1. Verify that P±(n^)=(I±n^⋅σ)/2P_\pm^{(\hat n)}=(I\pm\hat{\mathbf n}\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma)/2 are orthogonal projectors.
Solution

Use

(n^⋅σ)2=I.(\hat{\mathbf n}\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma)^2=I.

Then

(P±(n^))2=14(I±n^⋅σ)2=12(I±n^⋅σ)=P±(n^).\left( P_\pm^{(\hat n)} \right)^2 = \frac14 \left( I\pm\hat{\mathbf n}\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma \right)^2 = \frac12 \left( I\pm\hat{\mathbf n}\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma \right) = P_\pm^{(\hat n)}.

Also,

P+(n^)P−(n^)=14[I−(n^⋅σ)2]=0.P_+^{(\hat n)}P_-^{(\hat n)} = \frac14 \left[ I- (\hat{\mathbf n}\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma)^2 \right] = 0.
  1. A spin is prepared in ∣+z⟩|+z\rangle, then SxS_x is measured and the +x+x outcome is selected. What are the probabilities for a later SzS_z measurement?
Solution

After selecting +x+x, the state is ∣+x⟩|+x\rangle. In the SzS_z basis,

∣+x⟩=12(∣+z⟩+∣−z⟩).|+x\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt2} \left( |+z\rangle+|-z\rangle \right).

Therefore the later SzS_z probabilities are

p(+z)=12,p(−z)=12.p(+z)=\frac12, \qquad p(-z)=\frac12.
  • C. Cohen-Tannoudji, B. Diu, and F. Laloë, Quantum Mechanics, Wiley, 1977.
  • M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information, Cambridge University Press, 2010.
  • A. Peres, Quantum Theory: Concepts and Methods, Kluwer, 1995.
  • J. J. Sakurai and J. Napolitano, Modern Quantum Mechanics, 3rd ed., Cambridge University Press, 2020.
  • R. Shankar, Principles of Quantum Mechanics, 2nd ed., Springer, 1994.