Many quantization schemes rely on analogs of classical mechanics where the connections with classical mechanics are indirect. In this work I propose a new and direct connection between classical mechanics and quantum mechanics where the quantum mechanical propagator is derived from a variational principle. I identify this variational principle as a generalized form of Hamilton's principle. This proposed variational principle is unusual because the physical system is allowed to have imperfect information, i.e., there is incomplete knowledge of the physical state. Two distribution functionals over possible generalized momentum paths a[p(t)] and generalized coordinates paths b[q(t)] are defined. A generalized action is defined that corresponds to a contraction of a[p(t)], b[q(t)], and a matrix of the action evaluated at all possible p and q paths. Hamilton's principle is the extremization of the generalized action over all possible distributions. The normalization of the two distributions allows their values to be negative and they are shown to be the real and imaginary parts of the complex amplitude. The amplitude in the Feynman path integral is shown to be an optimal vector that extremizes the generalized action. This formulation is also shown to be directly applicable to statistical mechanics and I show how irreversible behavior and the micro-canonical ensemble follows immediately.
I propose a new and direct connection between classical mechanics and quantum mechanics where I derive the quantum mechanical propagator from a variational principle. This variational principle is Hamilton's modified principle generalized to allow many paths due to the non-local existence of particles in phase space. This principle allows a physical system to evolve non-locally in phase space while still allowing a representation that uses many classical paths. Whereas a point in phase space represents a classical system's state, I represent the state of a non-local system by a mixed trajectory. This formulation naturally leads to the transactional interpretation for resolving the paradoxes of the measurement problem. This principle also suggests a more flexible framework for formulating theories based on invariant actions and provides a single conceptual framework for discussing many areas of science.
Abstract The reconstruction of quantum physics has been connected with the interpretation of the quantum formalism, and has continued to be so with the recent deeper consideration of the relation of information to quantum states and processes. This recent form of reconstruction has mainly involved conceiving quantum theory on the basis of informational principles, providing new perspectives on physical correlations and entanglement that can be used to encode information. By contrast to the traditional, interpretational approach to the foundations of quantum mechanics, which attempts directly to establish the meaning of the elements of the theory and often touches on metaphysical issues, the newer, more purely reconstructive approach sometimes defers this task, focusing instead on the mathematical derivation of the theoretical apparatus from simple principles or axioms. In its most pure form, this sort of theory reconstruction is fundamentally the mathematical derivation of the elements of theory from explicitly presented, often operational principles involving a minimum of extra‐mathematical content. Here, a representative series of specifically information‐based treatments—from partial reconstructions that make connections with information to rigorous axiomatizations, including those involving the theories of generalized probability and abstract systems—is reviewed.
The general view is that all fundamental physical laws should be formulated within the framework given by quantum mechanics (QM). In a sense, QM therefore has the character of a metaphysical theory. Consequently, if it is possible to derive QM from more basic principles, these principles should be of general, philosophical nature. Here, we derive the formalism of QM from well-motivated epistemic principles. A key assumption is that a physical theory that relies on entities or distinctions that are unknowable in principle gives rise to wrong predictions. First, an epistemic formalism is developed, using concepts like knowledge and potential knowledge, identifying a physical state
S with the potential knowledge of the physical world. It is demonstrated that QM emerges from this formalism. However, Hilbert spaces, wave functions and probabilities are defined in certain well-defined observational contexts only. This means that the epistemic formalism is broader than QM. In the fundamental layer of description, the physical state
S is a subset of a state space
S={Z}, such that
S always contains many elements
Z. These elements correspond to unattainable states of complete knowledge of the world. The evolution of
S cannot be determined in terms of the individual evolution of the elements
Z, unlike the evolution of an ensemble in classical phase space. The evolution of
S is described in terms of sequential time
n∈N, which is updated according to
n→n+1 each time an event occurs, each time potential knowledge changes. Sequential time
n can be separated from relational time
t, which describes distances between events in space-time. There is an entire space-time associated with each
n, in which
t represents the knowledge at sequential time
n about the temporal relations between present and past events.
Abstract An earlier development of some results in quantum mechanics from a stochastic variational principle is extended in several directions. An outline is first given of the methods of control theory upon which the development is based, and earlier results are briefly described. Extensions are then given to relativistic systems, to Dirac’s equation, and to elementary quantum field theory. The aim thoughout is to show that results in the standard theory can be obtained in a uniform way from an extended form of Hamilton’s principle, which has the advantage of conciseness and a relatively close relationship to the classical theory. The wave function appears as a modified form of the optimal cost function, and the photon can be identified with a singularity in the electromagnetic field. Interference is explained by optimization of an expected value, the ensemble over which the expectation is taken being dependent upon the information available.