Recently I was reading about the projective measurement in "Quantum Computation and Quantum Information" by Nielsen & Chuang, where they describe the projective measurement as follows:
Projective measurements: A projective measurement is described by an observable, $M$, a Hermitian operator on the state space of the system being observed. The observable has a spectral decoomposition,
$$ M = \sum_m m P_m, $$
where $P_m$ is the projector onto the eigenspace of $M$ with eigenvalue $m$. The possible outcomes of the measurement correspond to the eigenvalues, $m$, of the observable. [...]
Usually, while conducting a measurement on a qubit we are using two projectors, namely $P_0 = |0\rangle \langle 0|$ and $P_1 = |1\rangle \langle 1 |$.
For the case of $P_0$ we have two possible eigenvalues:
- 0, with eigenvector $\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}$,
- 1, with eigenvector $\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} = |0\rangle$.
In the case of $P_1$ we have simmilar eigenvalues:
- 0, with eigenvector $\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}$,
- 1, with eigenvector $\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} = |1\rangle$.
Because qubit has to be normalized, I guess the eigenstates associated to the 0 eigenvalue cannot be obtained during a measurement. But if we would like to stick to the definition $M = \sum_m m P_m$ for $m = \{0,1\}$, we would get
$$ M = 0 \cdot P_0 + 1 \cdot P_1 = P_1,$$
which I think is incorrect.
Because of that, isn't the formulation of an observable as $M = \sum_m m P_m$ a little bit misleading? Shouldn't it be defined as
$$ M = \sum_m \lambda_m P_m,$$
where $\lambda_m$ is the eigenvalue associated to the appropriate state? Then we would get
$$ M = \lambda_0 P_0 + \lambda_1 P_1 = 1 \cdot P_0 + 1 \cdot P_1 = \mathbf{I}. $$