Quantum Foundations

We investigate the strengths and weaknesses of the Spekkens toy model for quantum states. We axiomatize the Spekkens toy model into a set of five axioms, regarding valid states, transformations, measurements and composition of systems. We present two relaxations of the Spekkens toy model, giving rise to two variant toy theories. By relaxing the axiom regarding valid transformations a group of toy operations is obtained that is equivalent to the projective extended Clifford Group for one and two qubits. However, the physical state of affairs resulting from this relaxation is undesirable, violating the desideratum that single toy bit operations must compose under the tensor product. The second variant toy theory is obtained by relaxing the axioms regarding valid states and measurements, resulting in a toy model that exhibits the Kochen-Specker property. Like the previous toy model, the relaxation renders the toy model physically undesirable. Therefore, we claim that the Spekkens toy model is optimal; altering its axioms does not yield a better epistemic description of quantum theory. This work is a collaboration with Gilad Gour, Aidan Roy and Barry C. Sanders.

Set theory provides foundations of mathematics in the sense that all the mathematical notions like numbers, functions, relations, structures are defined in the axiomatic set theory called ZFC. Quantum set theory naturally extends ZFC to quantum logic. Hence, we can expect that quantum set theory provides mathematics based on quantum logic. In this talk, I will show a useful application of quantum set theory to quantum mechanics based on the fact that the real numbers constructed in quantum set theory exactly corresponds to the quantum observables. The standard formulation of quantum mechanics answers the question as to in what state an observable A has the value in an interval I. However, the question is not answered as to in what state two observables A and B have the same value. The notion of equality between the values of observables will play many important roles in foundations of quantum mechanics. The notion of measurement of an observable relies on the condition that the observable to be measured and the meter after the measurement should have the same value. We can define the notion of quantum disturbance through the condition whether the values of the given observable before and after the process is the same. It is shown that all the observational propositions on a quantum system corresponds to some propositions in quantum set theory and the equality relation naturally provides the proposition that two observables have the same value. It has been broadly accepted that we cannot speak of the values of quantum observables without assuming a hidden variable theory. However, quantum set theory enables us to do so without assuming hidden variables but alternatively under the consist use of quantum logic, which is more or less considered as logic of the superposition principle. [1] M. Ozawa, Transfer principle in quantum set theory, J. Symbolic Logic 72, 625-648 (2007), online preprint: http://arxiv.org/abs/math.LO/0604349. [2] M. Ozawa, Quantum perfect correlations, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 321, 744--769 (2006), online preprint: LANL quant-ph/0501081.

I will comment on the prevailing atmosphere and attitudes that provoked the CJS theorem, aspects of the theorem itself, some features of the aftermath following the theorem and, finally, a critique of the relevance of the theorem based on my own research on position operators in Lorentz covariant quantum theory.

It is well known that the derivation of the Bell Inequality rests on two major assumptions, usually called outcome independence and parameter independence. Parameter independence seems to have a straightforward motivation: it expresses a non-signalling requirement between space-like separated sites and is thus motivated by locality. The status of outcome independence is much les clear. Many authors have argued that this assumption too expresses a locality requirement, in the form of a \'screening off\' condition. I will argue that the assumption also admits of an entirely different interpretation, suggested by the concept of sufficiency in the general theory of statistical inference. In this view, the assumption of outcome independence can be explained as expressing the idea that the specification of the hidden variable is sufficient, i.e. it exhausts all the relevant statistical information about the measurement outcomes. In this view, the assumption has no roots in locality at all. Rather, I would claim, it stems from the assumption that there exists such an exhaustive state description in our putative hidden variable theories.

The focus of this talk is a particular feature of the statistical behavior of elementary particles, simple composite systems of them and the quantum probability theory to which this behavior gives rise. The standard interpretation of a generalized probability theory of the sort found in quantum mechanics is that its probabilities are probabilities of propositions belonging to particles, where a proposition belongs to a particle if its constituent dynamical property is a possible property of the particle. The feature of interest is the fact that there exist simple systems and finite combinations of propositions belonging to them for which no two-valued measures are possible. I will argue that quantum probabilities are not satisfactorily interpretable as probabilities of propositions belonging to particles, and that such an interpretation is possible only when the propositions to which probabilities are assigned form (an algebraic structure which is homomorphic to) a Boolean algebra. The idea I will develop is that the probabilities of quantum mechanics are probabilities of “effects,” probabilities of the traces of particleinteractions with objects and processes that are epistemically accessible to us. I hope to make it clear that such a view is not committed to any kind of anti-realism about the micro-world, that its mildly instrumentalist flavor is not a defect but a strength, and that it illuminates at least one otherwise paradoxical feature of quantum mechanics.

Consider the quantum predictions for EPR-type measurements on two systems with Hilbert space of dimension at least 3 in any maximally entangled state. I show that the only possible hidden variables model of these probabilities that satisfies both Shimony\'s and Jarrett\'s condition of parameter independence (or `locality\') and Jones and Clifton\'s condition of conditional parameter independence (or `constrained locality\') is trivial, i.e. given by the quantum probabilities themselves. I shall attempt to discuss also the meaning of the conditions and of this result.

The dynamics of particles moving in a medium defined by its relativistically invariant stochastic properties is investigated. For this aim, the force exerted on the particles by the medium is defined by a stationary random variable as a function of the proper time of the particles. The equations of motion for a single one-dimensional particle are obtained and numerically solved. A conservation law for the drift momentum of the particle during its random motion is shown. Moreover, the conservation of the mean value of the total linear momentum for two particles repelling each other according to the Coulomb interaction also follows. Therefore, the results indicate the realization of a kind of stochastic Noether theorem in the system under study.

Chris Isham in pre-recorded video, with Andreas Doring fielding questions and clarifications. Like watching commentators Scott Hamilton and Katarina Witt analyze Kristi Yamaguchi\'s performance at the World Figure Skating Championships for CBS News, join us for something different in quantum foundations. Chris Isham parries the intricacies of topos theory; Andreas Doring shows us how to see the moves in slow motion. Bring your own popcorn and plenty of questions.

Quantum measure theory describes quantum theory as a generalization of a classical stochastic process, which may be fruitful for quantum gravity. I will describe the approach, and show that, in the context of an EPRB setup with two distant experimenters, two alternative experiments, and two outcomes per experiment, any set of no signaling probabilities can be realized, albeit by violating a `strong positivity\' condition.