One of the crucial differences between mathematical models of classical and quantum mechanics is the use of the tensor product of the state spaces of subsystems as the state space of the corresponding composite system. (To describe an ensemble of classical composite systems one uses random variables taking values in the Cartesian product of the state spaces of subsystems.) We show that, nevertheless, it is possible to establish a natural correspondence between the classical and quantum probabilistic descriptions of composite systems. Quantum averages for composite systems (including entangled) can be represented as averages with respect to classical random fields. It is essentially what Albert Einstein was dreamed of. Quantum mechanics is represented as classical statistical mechanics with infinite-dimensional phase space. While the mathematical construction is completely rigorous, its physical interpretation is a complicated problem (which will not be discussed in this paper).
One of the crucial differences between mathematical models of classical and quantum mechanics is the use of the tensor product of the state spaces of subsystems as the state space of the corresponding composite system. (To describe an ensemble of classical composite systems one uses random variables taking values in the Cartesian product of the state spaces of subsystems.) We show that, nevertheless, it is possible to establish a natural correspondence between the classical and quantum probabilistic descriptions of composite systems. Quantum averages for composite systems (including entangled) can be represented as averages with respect to classical random fields. It is essentially what Albert Einstein was dreamed of. Quantum mechanics is represented as classical statistical mechanics with infinite-dimensional phase space. While the mathematical construction is completely rigorous, its physical interpretation is a complicated problem (which will not be discussed in this paper).
One of the crucial differences between mathematical models of classical and quantum mechanics (QM) is the use of the tensor product of the state spaces of subsystems as the state space of the corresponding composite system. (To describe an ensemble of classical composite systems, one uses random variables taking values in the Cartesian product of the state spaces of subsystems.) We show that, nevertheless, it is possible to establish a natural correspondence between the classical and the quantum probabilistic descriptions of composite systems. Quantum averages for composite systems (including entangled) can be represented as averages with respect to classical random fields. It is essentially what Albert Einstein dreamed of. QM is represented as classical statistical mechanics with infinite-dimensional phase space. While the mathematical construction is completely rigorous, its physical interpretation is a complicated problem. We present the basic physical interpretation of prequantum classical statistical field theory in Sec. II. However, this is only the first step toward real physical theory.
Albert Einstein did not believe in completeness of QM. He dreamed of creation of prequantum classical statistical mechanics such that QM will be reproduced as its approximation. He also dreamed of total exclusion of corpuscules from the future model. Reality of Einstein's dream was pure fields' reality. Recently I made his dream come true in the form of so called prequantum classical statistical field theory (PCSFT). In this approach quantum systems are described by classical random fields, e.g., electromagnetic field (instead of photon), electron field or neutron field. In this paper we generalize PCSFT to composite quantum system. It is well known that in QM, unlike classical mechanics, the state of a composite system is described by the tensor product of state spaces for its subsystems. In PCSFT one can still use Cartesian product, but state spaces are spaces of classical fields (not particles). In particular, entanglement is nothing else than correlation of classical random fields, cf. again Einstein. Thus entanglement was finally demystified.
Quantum mechanics of composite systems, gives rise to certain special states called entangled states. A physical system, that is in an entangled state displays an intricate correlation between its subsystems. There are also some composite quantum states (classically correlated states or separable states) that are not entangled. It is generally claimed, often without a rigorous proof to support, that these intricate correlations of an entangled state cannot occur in a classical system. This expository article, provides an elementary proof that entangled states cannot arise in the setting of classical mechanics. In addition, a detailed description of the origin of entanglement in quantum systems is included. The mathematical concepts that are necessary for this purpose are presented. The absence of entanglement in the classical setting is due to the fact that every pure classical state of a composite system is a product state, that is, a tensor product of two pure states of the subsystems. In contrast, there are pure composite quantum states that cannot be expressed in the form of a product state or even by a convex sum of product states. Roughly speaking, this is because classical states are positive valued functions on the phase-space while quantum states are positive linear operators. The structure of the tensor product between two commutative spaces of scalar valued functions is drastically different from that of the tensor product between two non-commutative spaces of linear operators. In other words, entanglement is a non-commutative phenomenon.
The idea that quantum mechanics (QM) is simply a version of classical field theory is very old. Recently this idea has been realized in a new mathematical framework - on the basis of theory of random fields (L2-valued random variables). Surprisingly (for at least orthodox Copenhagenist) fundamental predictions of QM can be reproduced on the basis of a purely wave model (prequantum classical statistical field theory, PCSFT). In particular, all quantum correlations (including correlations of composite systems in entangled states) can be represented as correlations of classical random signals. These signals fluctuate at the space-time scale which is essentially finer than the scale of quantum measurements. At the moment we are not able to monitor such signals. However, one can expect that increasing of the precision of measurements will provide such a possibility. In this paper we show that bosonic and fermionic correlations can be obtained in the classical field framework. Finally, we stress that QM can be reduced to theory of classical random fields only in the presence of a relatively strong background field.
In Section 2.4 we learned that a composite quantum system, composed of two subsystems A and B , is associated with a tensor product space HA ? HB . Composite quantum systems have already played an important role in many instances in this text, especially in open systems and measurement models. In this chapter we dive deeper into tensor product spaces, discovering some strange implications of the quantum theory of composite quantum systems. As a result of its tensor product structure, quantum theory has embedded into it the phenomenon of entanglement , which is often seen as the foremost quantum feature. As early as in 1935 it puzzled Erwin Schrödinger, who introduced the German term Verschränkung [127] and Albert Einstein, who, together with Boris Podolski and Nathan Rosen, used the specific example of an entangled state to argue that quantum theory is incomplete [58]. In the 1960s John Bell demonstrated that the consequences of entanglement are incompatible with the Einstein– Podolsky–Rosen model of local realism [11], [12]. In recent years entanglement has been recognized as the resource for quantum information processing. Nowadays entanglement theory is a highly developed subject, and we can present only the mathematical basics. For the reader with a deeper interest in entanglement we recommend the recent reviews by Horodecki et al . [80] and Plenio et al . [118], which also cover the quantum information aspects of entanglement. To simplify our discussion we will assume that the Hilbert spaces are finite dimensional.
We show that the probabilistic formalism of QM can be obtained as a special projection of classical statistical mechanics for systems with an infinite number of degrees of freedom. Such systems can be interpreted as classical fields. Thus in our approach QM is a projection of (prequantum) classical statistical field theory (PCSFT). This projection is based on the Taylor expansion of classical physical variables – maps f: Ω → R, where Ω is the infinite-dimensional Hilbert space. The space of classical statistical states consists of Gaussian measures on Ω having zero mean value and negligibly small dispersion. On one hand, the creation of such a prequantum model strongly supports attempts (first of all by Schrödinger and Einstein) to create purely field model of QM. On the other hand, it gives the possibility to go beyond QM. The main experimental prediction is that averages calculated in the mathematical formalism of QM (von Neumann’s trace formula) are only approximative averages. If predictions of PCSFT are correct then it would be possible to find deviations of experimental averages from quantum ones. 1