In this paper we consider general probabilistic theories pertaining to circuits that satisfy two very natural assumptions. We provide a formalism that is local in the following very specific sense: calculations pertaining to any region of space–time employ only mathematical objects associated with that region. We call this formalism locality. It incorporates the idea that space and time should be treated on an equal footing. Formulations that use a foliation of space--time to evolve a state do not have this property, nor do histories-based approaches. An operation has inputs and outputs (through which systems travel), for example, A circuit is built by wiring together operations such that we have no open inputs or outputs left over. A fragment is a part of a circuit and may have open inputs and outputs, for example, We show how each operation is associated with a certain mathematical object, which we call a duotensor (this is like a tensor but with a bit more structure). The following diagram shows how a duotensor is represented graphically: We can link duotensors together such that black and white dots match up to get the duotensor corresponding to any fragment. The following diagram shows the duotensor for the above fragment: Links represent summation over the corresponding indices. We can use such duotensors to make probabilistic statements pertaining to fragments. Since fragments are the circuit equivalent of arbitrary space–time regions, we have formalism locality. The probability for a circuit is given by the corresponding duotensorial calculation (which is a scalar since there are no indices left over). We show how to put classical probability theory and quantum theory into this framework.
In this paper we consider general probabilistic theories pertaining to circuits that satisfy two very natural assumptions. We provide a formalism that is local in the following very specific sense: calculations pertaining to any region of space–time employ only mathematical objects associated with that region. We call this formalism locality. It incorporates the idea that space and time should be treated on an equal footing. Formulations that use a foliation of space--time to evolve a state do not have this property, nor do histories-based approaches. An operation has inputs and outputs (through which systems travel), for example, A circuit is built by wiring together operations such that we have no open inputs or outputs left over. A fragment is a part of a circuit and may have open inputs and outputs, for example, We show how each operation is associated with a certain mathematical object, which we call a duotensor (this is like a tensor but with a bit more structure). The following diagram shows how a duotensor is represented graphically: We can link duotensors together such that black and white dots match up to get the duotensor corresponding to any fragment. The following diagram shows the duotensor for the above fragment: Links represent summation over the corresponding indices. We can use such duotensors to make probabilistic statements pertaining to fragments. Since fragments are the circuit equivalent of arbitrary space–time regions, we have formalism locality. The probability for a circuit is given by the corresponding duotensorial calculation (which is a scalar since there are no indices left over). We show how to put classical probability theory and quantum theory into this framework.
Preamble In this chapter, a general mathematical framework for probabilistic theories of operationally understood circuits is laid out. Circuits consist of operations and wires. An operation is one use of an apparatus, and a wire is a diagrammatic device for showing how apertures on the apparatuses are placed next to each other. Mathematical objects are defined in terms of the circuit understood graphically. In particular, we do not think of the circuit as sitting in a background time. Circuits can be foliated by hypersurfaces composed of sets of wires. Systems are defined to be associated with wires. A closable set of operations is defined to be one for which the probability associated with any circuit built from this set is independent both of choices on other circuits and of extra circuitry that may be added to outputs from this circuit. States can be associated with circuit fragments corresponding to preparations. These states evolve on passing through circuit fragments corresponding to transformations. The composition of transformations is treated. A number of theorems are proven, including one that rules out quaternionic quantum theory. The case of locally tomographic theories (where local measurements on a systems components suffice to determine the global state) is considered. For such theories, the probability can be calculated for a circuit from matrices pertaining to the operations that constitute that circuit. Classical probability theory and quantum theory are exhibited as examples in this framework.
Introduction Indefinite causal structure poses particular problems for theory formulation since many of the core ideas used in the usual approaches to theory construction depend on having definite causal structure. For example, the notion of a state across space evolving in time requires that we have some definite causal structure so we can define a state on a space-like hypersurface. We will see that many of these problems are mitigated if we are able to formulate the theory in a formalism-local (or F-local) fashion. A formulation of a physical theory is said to be F-local if, in making predictions for any given arbitrary space-time region, we need only refer to mathematical objects pertaining to that region. This is a desirable property both on the grounds of efficiency and since, if we have indefinite causal structure, it is not clear how to select some other space-time region on which our calculations may depend. The usual ways of formulating physical theories (the time-evolving state picture, the histories approach, and the local-equations approach) are not F-local. We set up a framework for probabilistic theories with indefinite causal structure. This, the causaloid framework, is F-local. We describe how quantum theory can be formulated in the causaloid framework (in an F-local fashion). This provides yet another formulation of quantum theory. This formulation, however, may be particularly relevant to the problem of finding a theory of quantum gravity. The problem of quantum gravity is to find a theory that reduces in appropriate limits to general relativity and quantum theory (including, at least, those situations in which those two theories have been experimentally confirmed).
A typical quantum experiment has a bunch of apparatuses placed so that quantum systems can pass between them. We regard each use of an apparatus, along with some given outcome on the apparatus (a certain detector click or a certain meter reading for example), as an operation. An operation can have zero or more quantum systems inputted into it and zero or more quantum systems outputted from it. We can wire together operations to form circuits. In the standard framework of quantum theory we must foliate the circuit then calculate the probability by evolving a state through it. This approach has three problems. First, we must introduce an arbitrary foliation of the circuit (such foliations are not unique). Second, we have to pad our expressions with identities every time two or more foliation hypersurfaces intersect a given wire. And third, we treat operations corresponding to preparations, transformations, and results in different ways. In this paper we present the operator tensor formulation of quantum theory which solves all these problems. Corresponding to every operation is an operator tensor. The probability for a circuit is given by simply replacing the operations in the circuit with the corresponding operator tensors. Wires between operator tensors correspond to multiplying the tensors in the associated subspace and then taking the partial trace over that subspace. Operator tensors must be physical (namely, they must have positive input transpose and satisfy a certain normalization condition).
This is a book about operational probabilistic theories. The standard approach in such theories is from a time forward perspective. In this book we mostly take a time symmetric perspective. This presents a branding problem. Is this a niche book merely about time symmetry? No. This is a comprehensive book about operational probabilistic theories, but mostly from a time symmetric perspective. In fact, this book consists of (1) a simple book about simple operations having simple causal structure (where all the inputs are before all the outputs), and (2) a complex book about complex operations that can have complicated causal structure (a complex operation is equipped with a causal diagram). For the simple case we are able to show that the time symmetric perspective is equivalent to the time forward perspective. In each book we set up (A) operational probabilistic theories (OPTs) in terms of operations, (B) Operational Quantum Theory (OQT) in terms of operator tensors which correspond to operations, and (C) the theory of Hilbert objects which can be doubled up to give operator tensors. Operations are required to be physical which guarantees that circuits built out of operations have probabilities between 0 and 1 and that certain causality conditions are met. We prove that when we wire together operations the resulting networks are also physical. We model Sorkin's impossible measurements with complex operations and show that physicality prevents anomalous signalling. We develop diagrammatic notation for Hilbert objects. This includes mirrors for doubling up and mirror theorems. We use this framework to prove time symmetric causal dilation theorems for various causal diagrams.
In this paper, we present a formulation of quantum theory in terms of bold operator tensors. A circuit is built up of operations where an operation corresponds to a use of an apparatus. We associate collections of operator tensors (which together comprise a bold operator) with these apparatus uses. We give rules for combining bold operator tensors such that, for a circuit, they give a probability distribution over the possible outcomes. If we impose certain physicality constraints on the bold operator tensors, then we get exactly the quantum formalism. We provide both symbolic and diagrammatic ways to represent these calculations. This approach is manifestly covariant in that it does not require us to foliate the circuit into time steps and then evolve a state. Thus, the approach forms a natural starting point for an operational approach to quantum field theory.
In this paper, we provide what might be regarded as a manifestly covariant presentation of discrete quantum theory. A typical quantum experiment has a bunch of apparatuses placed so that quantum systems can pass between them. We regard each use of an apparatus, along with some given outcome on the apparatus (a certain detector click or a certain meter reading for example), as an operation. An operation (e.g. B(b(2)a(3))(a(1))) can have zero or more quantum systems inputted into it and zero or more quantum systems outputted from it. The operation B(b(2)a(3))(a(1)) has one system of type a inputted, and one system of type b and one system of type a outputted. We can wire together operations to form circuits, for example, A(a(1))B(b(2)a(3))(a(1))C(b(2)a(3)). Each repeated integer label here denotes a wire connecting an output to an input of the same type. As each operation in a circuit has an outcome associated with it, a circuit represents a set of outcomes that can happen in a run of the experiment. In the operator tensor formulation of quantum theory, each operation corresponds to an operator tensor. For example, the operation B(b(2)a(3))(a(1)) corresponds to the operator tensor B(b(2)a(3))(a(1)). Further, the probability for a general circuit is given by replacing operations with corresponding operator tensors as in Prob(A(a(1))B(b(2)a(3))(a(1))C(b(2)a(3))) = Â(a(1))B(b(2)a(3))(a(1))C(b(2)a(3)). Repeated integer labels indicate that we multiply in the associated subspace and then take the partial trace over that subspace. Operator tensors must be physical (namely, they must have positive input transpose and satisfy a certain normalization condition).