Reconstructions of quantum theory are a novel research program in theoretical physics which aims to uncover the unique physical features of quantum theory via axiomatization. I focus on Hardy’s “Quantum Theory from Five Reasonable Axioms” (2001), arguing that reconstructions represent a modern usage of axiomatization with significant points of continuity to von Neumann’s axiomatizations in quantum mechanics. In particular, I show that Hardy and von Neumann share similar methodological ordering, have a (...) common operational framing, and insist on the empirical basis of axioms. In the reconstruction programme, interesting points of discontinuity with historical axiomatizations include the stipulation of a generalized space of theories represented by a framework and the stipulation of analytic machinery at two levels of generality (first by establishing a generalized mathematical framework and then by positing specific formulations of axioms). In light of the reconstruction programme, I show that we should understand axiomatization attempts as being context–dependent, context which is contingent upon the goals of inquiry and the maturity of both mathematical formalism and theoretical underpinnings within the area of inquiry. Drawing on Mitsch (2022)’s account of axiomatization, I conclude that reconstructions should best be understood as provisional, practical, representations of quantum theory that are well suited for theory development and exploration. However, I propose my context–dependent re–framing of axiomatization as a means of enriching Mitsch’s account. (shrink)

On the basis of Mackey's axiomatic approach to quantum physics or, equivalently, of a “state-event-probability” (SEVP) structure, using a quite standard “fuzzification” procedure, a set of unsharp events (or “effects”) is constructed and the corresponding “state-effect-probability” (SEFP) structure is introduced. The introduction of some suitable axioms gives rise to a partially ordered structure of quantum Brouwer-Zadeh (BZ) poset; i.e., a poset endowed with two nonusual orthocomplementation mappings, a fuzzy-like orthocomplementation, and an intuitionistic-like orthocomplementation, whose set of sharp elements (...) is an orthomodular complete lattice. As customary, by these orthocomplementations the two modal-like necessity and possibility operators are introduced, and it is shown that Ludwig's and Jauch-Piron's approaches to quantum physics are “interpreted” in complete SEFP. As a marginal result, a standard procedure to construct a lot of unsharp realizations starting from any sharp realization of a fixed observable is given, and the relationship among sharp and corresponding unsharp realizations is studied. (shrink)

Hilbert's axiomatization program of physical theories met an interesting challenge when it confronted the rise of quantum mechanics in the mid-twenties. The novelty of the mathematical apparatus of the then newly born theory was to be matched only by its substantial lack of any definite physical interpretation. The early attempts at axiomatization, which are described here, reflect all the difficulty of the task faced by Jordan, Hilbert, von Neumann and others. The role of von Neumann is (...) examined in considerable detail as he can be viewed here as the most outstanding of Hilbert's heirs. Von Neumann, especially in his work devoted to the proof of the impossibility of hidden variables, not only continued Hilbert's program but pushed it to its very limits, blending axiomatic rigor and interpretative commitment. (shrink)

The first part of a new axiomatization for quantum mechanics is described. An expression is derived for the probability associated with a particular value of a variable for a given system at some time.

The axioms for the density operator in quantum mechanics are discussed. A comparison is made with an axiomatization based on Gleason's theorem.

The basis of a rigorous formal axiomatization of quantum mechanics is constructed, built upon Dirac's bra-ket notation. The system is three-sorted, with separate variables for scalars, vectors and operators. First-order quantification over all three types of variable is permitted. Economy in the axioms is effected by, e.g., assigning a single logical function * to transform (i) a scalar into its complex conjugate, (ii) a ket vector into a bra and a bra into a ket, (iii) an operator into (...) its adjoint. The system is accompanied by a formal semantics. Further papers will deal with vector subspaces and projection operators, operators with continuous spectra, tensor products, observables, and quantum mechanical probabilities. (shrink)

Quantum probability is used to provide a new organization of basic quantum theory in a logical, axiomatic way. The principal thesis is that there is one fundamental time evolution equation in quantum theory, and this is given by a new version of Born’s Rule, which now includes both consecutive and conditional probability as it must, since science is based on correlations. A major modification of one of the standard axioms of quantum theory allows (...) the implementation of various mathematically distinct models (commonly called ‘pictures’) of them. A natural definition of isomorphism of models is presented next. For a given Hamiltonian the standard ‘pictures’ of quantum theory (e.g., Schrödinger, Heisenberg, interaction) are isomorphic models, whose probabilities are nonetheless model independent. The Schrödinger equation remains valid in one model of the axioms, even though it is no longer the fundamental equation of time evolution. All the usual calculations of standard, textbook quantum theory remain valid, but they are put in a new light. For example, the ‘collapse’ of the state is now viewed in the Schrödinger model as _one_ step in a _two_ step algorithm for calculating _one_ conditional probability. In the isomorphic Heisenberg model, where states are constant in time, one has the same conditional probability given by the same formula. Also, entanglement is defined in a new, more general model independent way as an aspect of quantum probability without using ‘collapse’ or tensor products. (shrink)

In this paper we review the general framework of operational probabilistic theories, along with the six axioms from which quantum theory can be derived. We argue that the OPT framework along with a relaxed version of five of the axioms, define a general information theory. We close the paper with considerations about the role of the observer in an OPT, and the interpretation of the von Neumann postulate and the Schrödinger-cat paradox.

The present paper is the first part of a work which follows up on H. Kummer: “A constructive approach to the foundations of quantum mechanics,”Found. Phys. 17, 1–63 (1987). In that paper we deduced the JB-algebra structure of the space of observables (=detector space) of quantum mechanics within an axiomatic theory which uses the concept of a filter as primitive under the restrictive assumption that the detector space is finite-dimensional. This additional hypothesis will be dropped in the (...) present paper.It turns out that the relevant mathematics for our approach to a quantum mechanical system with infinite-dimensional detector space is the noncommutative spectral theory of Alfsen and Shultz.We start off with the same situation as in the previous paper (cf. Sects. 1 and 2 of the present paper). By postulating four axioms (Axioms S, DP, R, and SP of Sec. 3), we arrive in a natural way at the mathematical setting of Alfsen and Shultz, which consists of a dual pair of real ordered linear spaces 〈Y, M〉: A base norm space, called the strong source space (which, however, in slight contrast to the setting of Alfsen and Shultz, is not 1-additive) and an order unit space, called the weak detector space, which is the norm and order dual space of Y. The last section of part I contains the guiding example suggested by orthodox quantum mechanics. We observe that our axioms are satisfied in this example. In the second part of this work (which will appear in the next issue of this journal) we shall postulate three further axioms and derive the JB-algebra structure of quantum mechanics. (shrink)

Some mathematical theories in physics justify their explanatory superiority over earlier formalisms by the clarity of their postulates. In particular, axiomatic reconstructions drive home the importance of the composition rule and the continuity assumption as two pillars of quantum theory. Our approach sits on these pillars and combines new mathematics with a testable prediction. If the observer is defined by a limit on string complexity, information dynamics leads to an emergent continuous model in the critical regime. Restricting it (...) to a family of binary codes describing ‘bipartite systems,’ we find strong evidence of an upper bound on bipartite correlations equal to 2.82537. This is measurably different from the Tsirelson bound. The Hilbert space formalism emerges from this mathematical investigation as an effective description of a fundamental discrete theory in the critical regime. (shrink)

The aim of this paper is to explore the ways in which Axiomatic Reconstructions of Quantum Theory in terms of Information-Theoretic principles can contribute to explaining and understanding quantum phenomena, as well as to study their explanatory limitations. This is achieved in part by offering an account of the kind of explanation that axiomatic reconstructions of Quantum Theory provide, and re-evaluating the epistemic status of the program in light of this explanation. As illustrative case studies, (...) I take Clifton's, Bub's and Halvorson's characterization theorem and Popescu's and Rohrlich's toy models, and their explanatory contribution with respect to quantum nonlocality. On the one hand, I argue that ARQITs can aspire to provide genuine explanations of quantum nonlocality. On the other hand, I argue that such explanations cannot rule out a mechanical quantum theory. (shrink)

In this paper, I introduce an intrinsic account of the quantum state. This account contains three desirable features that the standard platonistic account lacks: (1) it does not refer to any abstract mathematical objects such as complex numbers, (2) it is independent of the usual arbitrary conventions in the wave function representation, and (3) it explains why the quantum state has its amplitude and phase degrees of freedom. -/- Consequently, this account extends Hartry Field’s program outlined in Science (...) Without Numbers (1980), responds to David Malament’s long-standing impossibility conjecture (1982), and establishes an important first step towards a genuinely intrinsic and nominalistic account of quantum mechanics. I will also compare the present account to Mark Balaguer’s (1996) nominalization of quantum mechanics and discuss how it might bear on the debate about “wave function realism.” In closing, I will suggest some possible ways to extend this account to accommodate spinorial degrees of freedom and a variable number of particles (e.g. for particle creation and annihilation). -/- Along the way, I axiomatize the quantum phase structure as what I shall call a “periodic difference structure” and prove a representation theorem as well as a uniqueness theorem. These formal results could prove fruitful for further investigation into the metaphysics of phase and theoretical structure. -/- (For a more recent version of this paper, please see "The Intrinsic Structure of Quantum Mechanics" available on PhilPapers.). (shrink)

The present paper comprises Sects. 5–8 of a work which proposes an axiomatic approach to quantum mechanics in which the concept of a filter is the central primitive concept. Having layed down the foundations in the first part of this work (which appeared in the last issue of this journal and comprises Sects. 0–4), we arrived at a dual pair 〈Y, M〉 consisting of abase norm space Y and anorder unit space M, being in order and norm duality with (...) respect to each other. This is precisely the setting of noncommutative spectral theory, a theory which has been developed during the late nineteen seventies by Alfsen and Shultz. (2,3) In this part we add to the four axioms (Axioms S, DP, R, SP) of Sect. 3 three further axioms (Axioms E, O, L). These axioms are suggested by the work of Alfsen and Shultz and enable us to derive the JB-algebra structure of quantum mechanics (cf. Theorem 8.9). (shrink)

The axiomatic approaches of quantum mechanics and relativity theory are compared with approaches in which the theories are thought to describe readings of certain measurement operations. The usual axioms are shown to correspond with classes of ideal measurements. The necessity is discussed of generalizing the formalisms of both quantum mechanics and relativity theory so as to encompass more realistic nonideal measurements. It is argued that this generalization favours an empiricist interpretation of the mathematical formalisms over a (...) realist one. (shrink)

Despite its long history and stunning experimental successes, the mathematical foundation of perturbative quantum field theory is still a subject of ongoing research. This book aims at presenting some of the most recent advances in the field, and at reflecting the diversity of approaches and tools invented and currently employed. Both leading experts and comparative newcomers to the field present their latest findings, helping readers to gain a better understanding of not only quantum but also classical field (...) theories. Though the book offers a valuable resource for mathematicians and physicists alike, the focus is more on mathematical developments. This volume consists of four parts: The first Part covers local aspects of perturbative quantum field theory, with an emphasis on the axiomatization of the algebra behind the operator product expansion. The second Part highlights Chern-Simons gauge theories, while the third examines (semi-)classical field theories. In closing, Part 4 addresses factorization homology and factorization algebras. (shrink)

We give an explicit axiomatic formulation of the quantum measurement theory which is free of the projection postulate. It is based on the generalized nondemolition principle applicable also to the unsharp, continuous-spectrum and continuous-in-time observations. The “collapsed state-vector” after the “objectification” is simply treated as a random vector of the a posterioristate given by the quantum filtering, i.e., the conditioning of the a prioriinduced state on the corresponding reduced algebra. The nonlinear phenomenological equation of “continuous spontaneous localization” (...) has been derived from the Schrödinger equation as a case of the quantum filtering equation for the diffusive nondemolition measurement. The quantum theory of measurement and filtering suggests also another type of the stochastic equation for the dynamical theory of continuous reduction, corresponding to the counting nondemolition measurement, which is more relevant for the quantum experiments. (shrink)

The physical, mathematical, and philosophical foundations of the quantum theory of free Bose fields in fixed general relativistic spacetimes are examined. It is argued that the theory is logically and mathematically consistent whereas semiclassical prescriptions for incorporating the back-reaction of the quantum field on the geometry lead to inconsistencies. Still, the relations and heuristic value of the semiclassical approach to canonical and covariant schemes of quantum gravity-plus-matter are assessed. Both conventional and rigorous formulations of the (...) theory and of its principal predictions, cosmological particle creation and horizon radiation, are expounded and compared. Special attention is devoted to spacetime properties needed for the existence or uniqueness of the relevant theoretical elements , renormalization of the stress tensor). The emergence of unitarily inequivalent representations in a single dynamical context is used as motivation for the introduction of the abstract $\rm C\sp{\*}$-algebraic axiomatic formalism. The operationalist and conventionalist claims of the original abstract algebraic program are criticized in favor of its tempered outgrowth, local quantum physics. The interpretation of the theory as a wave mechanics of classical field configurations, deriving from the Schrodinger representations of the abstract algebra, is discussed and is found superior, at least on the level of analogy, to particle or harmonic oscillator interpretations. Further, it is argued that the various detector results and the Fulling nonuniqueness problem do not undermine the particle concept in the ways commonly claimed. In particular, arguments are offered against the attribution of particle status to the Rindler quanta, against the physical realizability of the Rindler vacuum, and against the more general notion of observer-dependence as to the definition of 'particle' or 'vacuum'. However, the question of the ontological status of particles is raised in terms of the consistency of quantum field theory with non-reductive realism about particles, the latter being conceived as entities exhibiting attributes of discreteness and localizability. Two arguments against non-reductive realism about particles, one from axiomatic algebraic local quantum theory in Minkowski spacetime and one from quantum field theory in curved spacetime, are developed. (shrink)

A realistic axiomatic formulation of Galilean Quantum Field Theories is presented, from which the most important theorems of the theory can be deduced. In comparison with others formulations, the formal aspect has been improved by the use of certain mathematical theories, such as group theory and the theory of rigged Hilbert spaces. Our approach regards the fields as real things with symmetry properties. The general structure is analyzed and contrasted with relativistic theories.

A unified axiomatic theory that embraces both mechanics and thermodynamics is presented in three parts. It is based on four postulates; three are taken from quantum mechanics, and the fourth is the new disclosure of the existence of quantum states that are stable (Part I). For nonequilibrium and equilibrium states, the theory provides general original results, such as the relation between irreducible density operators and the maximum work that can be extracted adiabatically (Part IIa). For stable (...) equilibrium states, it shows for the first time that the canonical and grand canonical distributions are the only stable distributions (Part IIb). The theory discloses the incompleteness of the equation of motion of quantum mechanics not only for irreversible processes but, more significantly, for reversible processes (Part IIb). It establishes the operational meaning of an irreducible density operator and irreducible dispersions associated with any state, and reveals the relationship between such dispersions and the second law (Part III). (shrink)

The axiomatic approaches of quantum mechanics and relativity theory are compared with approaches in which the theories are thought to describe readings of certain measurement operations. The usual axioms are shown to correspond with classes of ideal measurements. The necessity is discussed of generalizing the formalisms of both quantum mechanics and relativity theory so as to encompass more realistic nonideal measurements. It is argued that this generalization favours an empiricist interpretation of the mathematical formalisms over a (...) realist one. (shrink)

Quantum theory may be formulated using Hilbert spaces over any of the three associative normed division algebras: the real numbers, the complex numbers and the quaternions. Indeed, these three choices appear naturally in a number of axiomatic approaches. However, there are internal problems with real or quaternionic quantum theory. Here we argue that these problems can be resolved if we treat real, complex and quaternionic quantum theory as part of a unified structure. Dyson called (...) this structure the ‘three-fold way’. It is perhaps easiest to see it in the study of irreducible unitary representations of groups on complex Hilbert spaces. These representations come in three kinds: those that are not isomorphic to their own dual (the truly ‘complex’ representations), those that are self-dual thanks to a symmetric bilinear pairing (which are ‘real’, in that they are the complexifications of representations on real Hilbert spaces), and those that are self-dual thanks to an antisymmetric bilinear pairing (which are ‘quaternionic’, in that they are the underlying complex representations of representations on quaternionic Hilbert spaces). This three-fold classification sheds light on the physics of time reversal symmetry, and it already plays an important role in particle physics. More generally, Hilbert spaces of any one of the three kinds—real, complex and quaternionic—can be seen as Hilbert spaces of the other kinds, equipped with extra structure. (shrink)

Science is always presupposing some basic concepts that are held to be useful. These absolute presuppositions (Collingwood) are rarely debated and form the framework for what has been termed paradigm by Kuhn. Our currently accepted scientific model is predicated on a set of presuppositions that have difficulty accommodating holistic structures and relationships and are not geared towards incorporating non-local correlations. Since the theoretical models we hold also determine what we perceive and take as scientifically viable, it is important to look (...) for an alternative model that can deal with holistic relationships. One approach is to generalise algebraic quantum theory, which is an inherently holistic framework, into a generic model. Relaxing some restrictions and definitions from quantum theory proper yields an axiomatic framework that can be applied to any type of system. Most importantly, it keeps the core of the quantum theoretical formalism. It is capable of handling complementary observables, i.e. descriptors which are non-commuting, incompatible and yet collectively required to fully describe certain situations. It also predicts a generalised form of non-local correlations that in quantum theory are known as entanglement. This generalised version is not quantum entanglement but an analogue form of holistic, non-local connectedness of elements within systems, predicted to occur whenever elements within systems are described by observables which are complementary to the description of the whole system. While a considerable body of circumstantial evidence supports the plausibility of the model, we are not yet in a position to use it for clear cut predictions that could be experimentally falsified. The series of papers offered in this special issue are the beginning of what we hope will become a rich scientific debate. (shrink)

This paper shows how different axiomatic and constructive approaches within quantum field theory can be understood in terms of the so-called ,picture theory' of Heinrich Hertz. Each approach will count as a different picture due to the different status of the various concepts (symbols) they are employing, like observables, gauge invariance, confinement or the space-time continuum. An important difference with the original Hertzian approach is the fact that the different approaches in quantum field theory have (...) partially overlapping, partially supplementing domains of application. This also marks some of the parallels and differences with contemporary debates on structural realism and model-theoretic approaches in the philosophy of physics. The objection that the talk about different pictures just relies on the fact that quantum field theory is unfinished will be countered. Finally, the Hertzian approach will be briefly elaborated and embedded into its philosophical successor projects of Cassirer and Goodman. German Dieser Aufsatz zeigt, wie verschiedene axiomatische und konstruktive Ansätze in der Quantenfeldtheorie mit Hilfe der sogenannten ,,Bildtheorie“ von Heinrich Hertz verstanden werden können. Aufgrund der unterschiedlichen Stellungen der verschiedenen Konzepte (Symbole), die diese Ansätze benutzen - wie etwa Observable, Eichinvarianz, Confinement oder Raum-Zeit-Kontinuum - wird jeder als ein eigenes Bild zu betrachten sein. Ein wichtiger Unterschied zu Hertz' ursprünglicher Fassung der Bildtheorie sind dabei die unterschiedlichen Anwendungsbereiche der Ansätze in der Quantenfeldtheorie. Diese überschneiden sich zum Teil, zum Teil ergänzen sie einander. Dadurch ergeben sich für die bildtheoretische Interpretation wichtige Parallelen und Unterschiede zu anderen Positionen in der Philosophie der Physik, insbesondere zum Strukturrealismus und zur Modell-Theorie. Neben diesen diskutiere ich den Einwand, dass die Redeweise von verschiedenen Bildern in der Quantenfeldtheorie nur deshalb möglich sei, weil die Theorie noch nicht abgeschlossen ist. Schließlich erweitere ich die Hertzsche Bildtheorie und setze sie dabei in Beziehung zu ihren philosophischen Nachfolgeprojekten bei Cassirer und Goodman. (shrink)

A realistic axiomatic formulation of nonrelativistic quantum mechanics for a single microsystem with spin is presented, from which the most important theorems of the theory can be deduced. In comparison with previous formulations, the formal aspect has been improved by the use of certain mathematical theories, such as the theory of equipped spaces, and group theory. The standard formalism is naturally obtained from the latter, starting from a central primitive concept: the Galilei group.

Authoritative appraisals have qualified this book as an “axiomatic” theory. However, given that its essential content is no more than an analogy, its theoretical organization cannot be axiomatic. Indeed, in the first edition Dirac declares that he had avoided an axiomatic presentation. Moreover, I show that the text aims to solve a basic problem (How quantum mechanics is similar to classical mechanics?). A previous paper analyzed all past theories of physics, chemistry and mathematics, presented by the respective authors (...) non-axiomatically. Four characteristic features of a new model of organizing a theory were recognized. A careful examination of Dirac’s text shows that it actually applied this kind of organization of a theory, confirming formally what Kronz and Lupher suggested through intuitive categories (pragmatism and rigour), i.e. Dirac’s formulation of Quantum mechanics represents a distinct theoretical approach from von Neumann’s axiomatic approach. However, since the second edition Dirac has changed his approach: although relying again on analogy, his theory refers to the axiomatic method. Some considerations on the odd paths which led to the present formulation of QM are added. They suggest that a new foundation of this theory needs to be found. (shrink)

The debate between Fraser and Wallace over the foundations of quantum field theory has spawned increased focus on both the axiomatic and conventional formalisms. The debate has set the tone for future foundational analysis, and has forced philosophers to “pick a side”. The two are seen as competing research programs, and the major divide between the two manifests in how each handles renormalization. In this paper I argue that the terms set by the Fraser-Wallace debate are misleading. AQFT (...) and CQFT should be viewed as complementary formalisms that start from the same physical basis. Further, the focus on cutoffs as demarcating the two approaches is also highly misleading. Though their methods differ, both axiomatic and conventional QFT seek to use the same physical principles to explain the same domain of phenomena. (shrink)

We construct a sheaf-theoretic representation of quantum probabilistic structures, in terms of covering systems of Boolean measure algebras. These systems coordinatize quantum states by means of Boolean coefficients, interpreted as Boolean localization measures. The representation is based on the existence of a pair of adjoint functors between the category of presheaves of Boolean measure algebras and the category of quantum measure algebras. The sheaf-theoretic semantic transition of quantum structures shifts their physical significance from the orthoposet (...) class='Hi'>axiomatization at the level of events, to the sheaf-theoretic gluing conditions at the level of Boolean localization systems. (shrink)

Further arguments are offered in defence of the position that the variant of quantum field theory (QFT) that should be subject to interpretation and foundational analysis is axiomatic quantum field theory. I argue that the successful application of renormalization group (RG) methods within alternative formulations of QFT illuminates the empirical content of QFT, but not the theoretical content. RG methods corroborate the point of view that QFT is a case of the underdetermination of theory by (...) empirical evidence. I also urge caution in extrapolating interpretive conclusions about QFT from the application of RG methods in other contexts (e.g., condensed matter physics). This paper replies to criticisms advanced by David Wallace, but aims to be self-contained. (shrink)

In this paper we use the framework of generalized probabilistic theories to present two sets of basic assumptions, called axioms, for which we show that they lead to the Hilbert space formulation of quantum mechanics. The key results in this derivation are the co-ordinatization of generalized geometries and a theorem of Solér which characterizes Hilbert spaces among the orthomodular spaces. A generalized Wigner theorem is applied to reduce some of the assumptions of Solér’s theorem to the theory of (...) symmetry in quantum mechanics. Since this reduction is only partial we also point out the remaining open questions. (shrink)

This paper surveys John von Neumann's work on the mathematical foundations of quantum theories in the light of Hilbert's Sixth Problem concerning the geometrical axiomatization of physics. We argue that in von Neumann's view geometry was so tied to logic that he ultimately developed a logical interpretation of quantum probabilities. That motivated his abandonment of Hilbert space in favor of von Neumann algebras, specifically the type II1II1 factors, as the proper limit of quantum mechanics in infinite (...) dimensions. Finally, we present the reasons why his axiomatic program remained an “unsolved problem” in mathematical physics. A recent unpublished result by Huzimiro Araki, proving that no algebra with a tracial state defined on it, such as the type II1II1 factors, can support any (regular) representation of the canonical commutation relations, is also reviewed and its consequences for von Neumann's projects are discussed. (shrink)

Written for advanced undergraduates, physicists, and historians and philosophers of physics, this book tells the story of the development of our understanding of quantum phenomena through the extraordinary years of the first three decades of the twentieth century. Rather than following the standard axiomatic approach, this book adopts a historical perspective, explaining clearly and authoritatively how pioneers such as Heisenberg, Schrodinger, Pauli and Dirac developed the fundamentals of quantum mechanics and merged them into a coherent theory, and (...) why the mathematical infrastructure of quantum mechanics has to be as complex as it is. The author creates a compelling narrative, providing a remarkable example of how physics and mathematics work in practice. The book encourages an enhanced appreciation of the interaction between mathematics, theory and experiment, helping the reader gain a deeper understanding of the development and content of quantum mechanics than any other text at this level. (shrink)

An axiomatic foundation of a quantum theory for microsystems in the presence of external fields is developed. The space-time structure is introduced by considering the invariance of the theory under a kinematic invariance group. The formalism is illustrated by the example of charged particles in electromagnetic potentials. In the example, gauge invariance is discussed.

We show that using quasi-set theory, or the theory of collections of indistinguishable objects, we can define an algebra that has most of the standard properties of an orthocomplete orthomodular lattice, which is the lattice of all closed subspaces of a Hilbert space. We call the mathematical structure so obtained $\mathfrak{I}$-lattice. After discussing (in a preliminary form) some aspects of such a structure, we indicate the next problem of axiomatizing the corresponding logic, that is, a logic which has (...) $\mathfrak{I}$-lattices as its Lindembaum algebra, which we postpone to a future work. Thus we conclude that the initial intuitions by Birkhoff and von Neumann that the ``logic of quantum mechanics" would be not classical logic (a Boolean algebra), is consonant with the idea of considering indistinguishability right from the start, that is, as a primitive concept. In the first sections, we present the main motivations and a ``classical'' situation which mirrors that one we focus on the last part of the paper. This paper is our first analysis of the algebraic structure of indiscernibility. (shrink)

We show that using quasi-set theory, or the theory of collections of indistinguishable objects, we can define an algebra that has most of the standard properties of an orthocomplete orthomodular lattice, which is the lattice of all closed subspaces of a Hilbert space. We call the mathematical structure so obtained $\mathfrak{I}$-lattice. After discussing some aspects of such a structure, we indicate the next problem of axiomatizing the corresponding logic, that is, a logic which has $\mathfrak{I}$-lattices as its Lindembaum (...) algebra, which we postpone to a future work. Thus we conclude that the initial intuitions by Birkhoff and von Neumann that the ``logic of quantum mechanics" would be not classical logic, is consonant with the idea of considering indistinguishability right from the start, that is, as a primitive concept. In the first sections, we present the main motivations and a ``classical'' situation which mirrors that one we focus on the last part of the paper. This paper is our first analysis of the algebraic structure of indiscernibility. (shrink)

This paper has two parts, a historical and a systematic. In the historical part it is argued that the two major axiomatic approaches to relativistic quantum field theory, the Wightman and Haag-Kastler axiomatizations, are realizations of the program of axiomatization of physical theories announced by Hilbert in his 6th of the 23 problems discussed in his famous 1900 Paris lecture on open problems in mathematics, if axiomatizing physical theories is interpreted in a soft and opportunistic sense suggested (...) in 1927 by Hilbert, Nordheim, and von Neumann. To show this, Section 2 recalls first some of Hilbert's views about the axiomatic approach to physical theories as these were formulated in his 6th problem. It will be .. (shrink)

One of the most challenging and fascinating issue in mathematical and theoretical physics concerns the possibility of identifying the logic underlying the so-called quantum universe, i.e., Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Gravity. Besides the sheer difficulty of the problem, inherent in the actual formulation of Quantum Mechanics—and especially of Quantum Gravity—to be used for such a task, a crucial aspect lies in the identification of the appropriate axiomatic logical proposition calculus to be associated to such theories. (...) In this paper the issue of the validity of the conventional principle of non-contradiction is called into question and is investigated in the context of non-relativistic Quantum Mechanics. In the same framework a modified form of the principle, denoted as 3-way PNC is shown to apply, which relates the axioms of quantum logic with the physical requirements placed by the Heisenberg Indeterminacy Principle. (shrink)

Our aim in this paper is to take quite seriously Heinz Post’s claim that the non-individuality and the indiscernibility of quantum objects should be introduced right at the start, and not made a posteriori by introducing symmetry conditions. Using a different mathematical framework, namely, quasi-set theory, we avoid working within a label-tensor-product-vector-space-formalism, to use Redhead and Teller’s words, and get a more intuitive way of dealing with the formalism of quantum mechanics, although the underlying logic should be (...) modified. We build a vector space with inner product, the Q-space, using the non-classical part of quasi-set theory, to deal with indistinguishable elements. Vectors in Q-space refer only to occupation numbers and permutation operators act as the identity operator on them, reflecting in the formalism the fact of unobservability of permutations. Thus, this paper can be regarded as a tentative to follow and enlarge Heinsenberg’s suggestion that new phenomena require the formation of a new “closed” (that is, axiomatic) theory, coping also with the physical theory’s underlying logic and mathematics. (shrink)

A realistic physical axiomatic approach of the relativistic quantum field theory is presented. Following the action principle of Schwinger, a covariant and general formulation is obtained. The correspondence principle is not invoked and the commutation relations are not postulated but deduced. The most important theorems such as spin-statistics, and CPT are proved. The theory is constructed form the notion of basic field and system of basic fields. In comparison with others formulations, in our realistic approach fields are (...) regarded as real things with symmetry properties. Finally, the general structure is contrasted with other formulations. (shrink)

This axiomatization is based on the observation that ifG is the group of automorphisms of the states (induced, e.g., by suitable evolutions), then we can define a spherical function by mapping each element ofG to the matrix of its transition probabilities. Starting from five physically conservative axioms, we utilize the correspondence between spherical functions and representations to apply the structure theory for compact Lie groups and their orbits in representation spaces to arrive at the standard complex Hilbert space (...) structure of quantum mechanics. (shrink)

In this article I deal with the notion of observation, from a phenomenologically motivated point of view, and its representation mainly by means of the formal language of quantum mechanics. In doing so, I have taken the notion of observation in two diverse contexts. In one context as a notion related with objects of a logical-mathematical theory taken as registered facts of phenomenological perception ( Wahrnehmung ) inasmuch as this phenomenological idea can also be linked with a process (...) of measurement on the quantum-mechanical level. In another context I have taken it as connected with a notion of temporal constitution basically as it is described in E. Husserl’s texts on the phenomenology of temporal consciousness. Given that mathematical objects as formal-ontological objects can be thought of as abstractions of perceptual objects by means of categorial intuition, the question is whether and under what theoretical assumptions we can, in principle, include quantum objects in abstraction in the class of formal-ontological objects and thus inquire on the limits of their description within a formal-axiomatical theory. On the one hand, I derive an irreducibility on the level of individuals taken in formal representation as syntactical atoms-substrates without any further content and on the other hand a transcendental subjectivity of consciousness objectified as a self-constituted temporal unity upon which it is ultimately grounded the possibility of generation of an abstract predicative universe of discourse. (shrink)

After leading to a new axiomatic derivation of quantum theory, the new informational paradigm is entering the domain of quantum field theory, suggesting a quantum automata framework that can be regarded as an extension of quantum field theory to including an hypothetical Planck scale, and with the usual quantum field theory recovered in the relativistic limit of small wave-vectors. Being derived from simple principles, the automata theory is quantum ab-initio, (...) and does not assume Lorentz covariance and mechanical notions. Being discrete it can describe localized states and measurements, solving all the issues plaguing field theory originated from the continuum. These features make the theory an ideal framework for quantum gravity, with relativistic covariance and space-time emergent solely from the interactions, and not assumed a priori. The paper presents a synthetic derivation of the automata theory, showing how the principles lead to a description in terms of a quantum automaton over a Cayley graph of a group. Restricting to Abelian groups we show how the automata recover the Weyl, Dirac and Maxwell dynamics in the relativistic limit. We conclude with some new routes about the more general scenario of non-Abelian Cayley graphs. The phenomenology arising from the automata theory in the ultra-relativistic domain and the analysis of corresponding distorted Lorentz covariance is reviewed in Bisio et al. (shrink)

From the beginning, the implications of quantum theory for our most general understanding of the world have been a matter of intense debate. Einstein argues that the theory had to be regarded as fundamentally incomplete. Its inability, for example, to predict the exact time of decay of a single radioactive atom had to be due to a failure of the theory and not due to a permanent inability on our part or a fundamental indeterminism in nature (...) itself. In 1964, John Bell derived a theorem which showed that any deterministic theory which preserved locality would have certain consequences for measurements performed at a distance from one another. An experimental check seems to show that these consequences are not, in fact, realized. The correlation between the sets of events is much stronger than any local deterministic theory could allow. What is more, this stronger correlation is precisely that which is predicted by quantum theory. The astonishing result is that local deterministic theories of the classical sort seem to be permanently excluded. Not only can the individual decay not be predicted, but no future theory can ever predict it. The contributors in this volume wrestle with this conclusion. Some welcome it; others leave open a return to at lease some kind of deterministic world, one which must however allow something like action-at-a distance. How much lit it? And how can one avoid violating relativity theory, which excludes action-at-a-distance? How can a clash between the two fundamental theories of modern physics, relativity and quantum theory, be avoided? What are the consequences for the traditional philosophic issue of causality explanation and objectivity? One thing is certain; we can never return to the comfortable Newtonian world where everything that happened was, in principle, predictable and where what happened at one measurement site could not affect another set of measurements being performed light-years away, at a distance that a light-signal could not bridge. Contributors: James T. Cushing, Abner Shimony, N. David Mermin, Jon P. Jarrett, Linda Wessels, Bas C. van Fraassen, Jeremy Butterfield, Michael L. G. Redhead, Henry P. Stapp, Arthur Fine, R. I. G. Hughes, Paul Teller, Don Howard, Henry J. Folse, and Ernan McMullin. (shrink)

A dynamical analysis of standard procedures for subensemble selection is used to show that the state restriction violation proposal in Part I of the paper cannot be realized by employing familiar correlation schemes. However, it is shown that measurement of an observable not commuting with the superselection operator is possible, a violation of the observable restrictions. This is interpreted as supporting the position that each of these restrictions is sufficient but not necessary for the superselection rule. The results do constitute (...) a proposal for superselection rule violation in theories requiring both restrictions, e.g., the axiomatic treatment by Bogolubov, Logunov, and Todorov. It is also concluded that superselection rules place restrictions on procedures for selective state preparations using correlations. More generally, it is conjectured that a mathematically conceivable decomposition of a given density operator does not necessarily represent a possibility for partitioning of the corresponding ensemble into subensembles by any physically realizable means. (shrink)

This book studies the foundations of quantum theory through its relationship to classical physics. This idea goes back to the Copenhagen Interpretation (in the original version due to Bohr and Heisenberg), which the author relates to the mathematical formalism of operator algebras originally created by von Neumann. The book therefore includes comprehensive appendices on functional analysis and C*-algebras, as well as a briefer one on logic, category theory, and topos theory. Matters of foundational as well as (...) mathematical interest that are covered in detail include symmetry (and its "spontaneous" breaking), the measurement problem, the Kochen-Specker, Free Will, and Bell Theorems, the Kadison-Singer conjecture, quantization, indistinguishable particles, the quantum theory of large systems, and quantum logic, the latter in connection with the topos approach to quantum theory. This book is Open Access under a CC BY licence. (shrink)

Axiomatic quantum field theory is one approach to the project of merging the special theory of relativity with that of ordinary quantum mechanics. The project begins with the postulation of a set of axioms. Axioms should be motivated by reasonable physical principles in a way that illustrates how a given axiom is true. Motivations are often grounded in the principles of the parent theories: ordinary quantum mechanics or the theory of special relativity. Amongst the (...) set of axioms first proposed by Haag and Kastler in 1963 is the axiom of microcausality. Microcausality requires the observables of regions at space-like separation to commute. This thesis seeks to answer the question ‘What principles from the special theory of relativity or ordinary quantum mechanics motivate, or justify, accepting microcausality as an axiom?’ The first chapter will provide the necessary background to investigate this question and the second chapter will undertake that investigation. In conclusion, microcausality cannot be well-motivated by individual principles rooted in the special theory of relativity or ordinary quantum mechanics. (shrink)

The projection postulate is the source of a long standing controversy in the interpretation of the axiomatic foundations of quantum mechanics. In a sense which is made precise in chapter II the projection postulate is a mathematical theorem easily derivable within the mathematical framework of the theory. This theorem receives a clear and straightforward interpretation if Luders' rule is given only statistical significance. Under the assumption that an interpretation of quantum mechanics has to provide an account of (...) the process of measurement as a change on the state of individual systems, however, additional interpretive assumptions are needed in order to arrive at a satisfactory interpretation of Luders' rule. ;I show in chapter III that there are serious problems with the usual interpretation by making explicit in a quantum logical framework the concept of individual state and minimal disturbance implicit in this view. In chapter IV I show that it is possible to formulate a natural interpretation of Luders' rule as a description of 'dispersion free' state transformations within a semantic framework that takes states of individual systems to be represented by Boolean ultrafilters , as opposed to the usual approach that takes individual states to be represented by lattice ultrafilters. This lay the ground for the clarification of several interpretive issues in the foundations of quantum mechanics. It is shown that Luders' rule can be justified as a description of individual state transformations without the need of imposing additional assumptions. The derivation of Luders' rule within the semantic framework of B-states shows an important connection between interpretation that take individual state to be 'relative' to experimental situations and the statistical structure of the theory. (shrink)

We introduce a realist, unextravagant interpretation of quantum theory that builds on the existing physical structure of the theory and allows experiments to have definite outcomes but leaves the theory’s basic dynamical content essentially intact. Much as classical systems have specific states that evolve along definite trajectories through configuration spaces, the traditional formulation of quantum theory permits assuming that closed quantum systems have specific states that evolve unitarily along definite trajectories through Hilbert spaces, (...) and our interpretation extends this intuitive picture of states and Hilbert-space trajectories to the more realistic case of open quantum systems despite the generic development of entanglement. We provide independent justification for the partial-trace operation for density matrices, reformulate wave-function collapse in terms of an underlying interpolating dynamics, derive the Born rule from deeper principles, resolve several open questions regarding ontological stability and dynamics, address a number of familiar no-go theorems, and argue that our interpretation is ultimately compatible with Lorentz invariance. Along the way, we also investigate a number of unexplored features of quantum theory, including an interesting geometrical structure—which we call subsystem space—that we believe merits further study. We conclude with a summary, a list of criteria for future work on quantum foundations, and further research directions. We include an appendix that briefly reviews the traditional Copenhagen interpretation and the measurement problem of quantum theory, as well as the instrumentalist approach and a collection of foundational theorems not otherwise discussed in the main text. (shrink)

Quantum field theory (QFT) presents a genuine example of the underdetermination of theory by empirical evidence. There are variants of QFT—for example, the standard textbook formulation and the rigorous axiomatic formulation—that are empirically indistinguishable yet support different interpretations. This case is of particular interest to philosophers of physics because, before the philosophical work of interpreting QFT can proceed, the question of which variant should be subject to interpretation must be settled. New arguments are offered for basing the (...) interpretation of QFT on a rigorous axiomatic variant of the theory. The pivotal considerations are the roles that consistency and idealization play in this case. *Received June 2009; revised August 2009. †To contact the author, please write to: Department of Philosophy, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada; e‐mail: [email protected]. (shrink)