Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1112.5701

Superselection Rules from Measurement Theory

Shogo Tanimura

Published Dec 24, 2011• 4 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

In quantum theory, physically measurable quantities of a microscopic system are represented by self-adjoint operators. However, not all of the self-adjoint operators correspond to measurable quantities. The superselection rule is a criterion to distinguish measurable quantities. Any measurable quantity must obey the superselection rules. By contraposition, any quantity which does not obey the superselection rules cannot be measured. Although some of superselection rules were proved, the raizon d'être of the superselection rules has been still obscure. In this paper we deduce the superselection rules from an assumption on symmetry property of measurement process. We introduce the notion of covariant indicator, which is a macroscopic observable whose value indicates the value of a microscopic object observable. We prove that if an object system has a quantity that is conserved during the measurement process, other quantities that do not commute with the conserved quantity are non-measurable by the covariant indicator. Our derivation of superselection rules is compared with the uncertainty relation under the restriction by a conservation law. An implication of the color superselection rule for the color confinement is discussed. It is also argued that spontaneous symmetry breaking enables a measurement that the superselection rule prohibits.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1112.5701

Related papers

Quantum Measurements in thePresence of Symmetry

Leon Loveridge

This thesis concerns how symmetries impinge on quantum mechanical measurements, and preclude certain self adjoint operators from representing observable quantities. After developing the requisite mathematical machinery and aspects of quantum measurement theory necessary for our analysis, we proceed to critically review the literature surrounding the remarkable theorem of Wigner, Araki and Yanase (WAY) that prohibits accurate and repeatable measurements of any observable not commuting with an additive conserved quantity, as well as discussing the conditions under which approximate measurements with approximate degrees of repeatability can be achieved. We strengthen the original statement of the WAY theorem and generalise it to the case of position measurements obeying momentum conservation, leading to a solution of a long-standing problem of Stein and Shimony. A superselection rule appearing as the existence of an observable which commutes with all others gives rise to a stronger restriction than the WAY theorem, yielding self adjoint operators which do not represent observable quantities. We analyse various perspectives on superselection rules, aiming to clarify different viewpoints appearing in the literature since the inception of the topic in 1952. We exploit an explicit description of relative phase observables which have been lacking in other contributions, delineating conditions under which relative and (prohibited) absolute phases become statistically close. By providing simple models we are able to mimic a number of attempts to overcome superselection rules, in order to highlight the generic features of such attempts. We show that the statistical proximity of absolute and relative quantities arises only when there is a highly localised phase reference, and that the superselection rule compatible relative phase factors between certain superpositions takes on the appearence of a forbidden relative phase factor in this limit. However, we argue that these relative phase factors can be determined fully within the confines of a superselection rule.

•Jul 1, 2012•4 citations

The Trouble with Superselection Accounts of Measurement

Mariam Thalos

A superselection rule advanced in the course of a quantum-mechanical treatment of some phenomenon is an assertion to the effect that the superposition principle of quantum mechanics is to be restricted in the application at hand. Superselection accounts of measurement all have in common a decision to represent the indicator states of detectors by eigenspaces of superselection operators named in a superselection rule, on the grounds that the states in question are states of a so-called classical quantity and therefore not subject to quantum interference effects. By this strategy superselectionists of measurement expect to dispense with use of projection postulates in treatments of measurement. I shall argue that superselection accounts of measurement are self-contradictory, and that treatments of infinite systems, if they can avoid the contradiction, are not true superselection accounts.

Philosophy of Science•Sep 1, 1998•2 citations

On superselection rules for macroscopic objects

Прохоров Лев Васильевич

It is shown that for "ideal" macroscopic objects there are superselection rules forbidding superpositions of macroscopically distinguishable states of the objects. For real macroscopic bodies the notion of "weak" superselection rules is introduced. Some other aspects of the measurement problem are discussed.

arXiv:quant-ph/0406220•Jun 29, 2004•0 citations

Static Description of Quantum Systems

Enrico G. Beltrametti, Gianni Cassinelli, Peter Carruthers

The Hilbert-Space Description By the static description of a physical system we mean the rules that assign specified mathematical objects to the states and to the physical quantities of the system, and the prescriptions for calculating the probability distribution of the possible values of every physical quantity when the state of the system is given. In the usual Hilbert-space formulation of quantum mechanics, to each physical system is attached a separable Hilbert space (generally infinite-dimensional) over the complex field. To every physical quantity is associated a linear, self-adjoint, not necessarily bounded operator on. If one deals with a strictly quantum system, then the converse is also generally assumed: every self-adjoint operator on represents some physical quan- tity. The restriction “strictly quantum” is necessary: if the system retains some nonquantum (i.e. classical) feature, so that it requires the algorithm of so-called “superselection rules” (see Chapter 5), then there are self-adjoint operators on that do not represent physical quantities. It should also be stressed that even in the strictly quantum case, most of the self-adjoint operators actually do not represent “interesting” physical quantities: only a few of them represent physical quantities that are useful and meaningful for the description of the physical system (e.g., energy, momentum, position, angular momentum). Therefore, by asserting that every self-adjoint operator on corresponds to some physical quantity we mean there is no a priori impossibility of devising such a correspondence, but we do not claim that this correspondence is present in the real work of experimental physics.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Dec 28, 1984•0 citations

Superselection Rule for Charge

G. C. Wick, Arthur S. Wightman, Eugene Paul Wigner

The customary notion of superselection rule stipulates the vanishing of those matrix elements of the density matrix that connect states separated by the superselection rule, i.e., the relative phases of which are, according to the superselection rule, meaningless. It is shown that, if any two states for which an additive conserved quantity has different values are separated for all physical systems by a superselection rule at one time, the separation will persist for all times. It is concluded that the states with different electric (or baryonic) charges are so separated. The reason for the difference between electric charge and other additive conserved quantities, such as momentum, is brought out.

Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields•Jun 15, 1970•91 citations

On superselection rules in Bohm–Bell theories

Samuel Colin, Thomas Durt, Roderich Tumulka

The meaning of superselection rules in Bohm–Bell theories (i.e., quantum theories with particle trajectories) is different from that in orthodox quantum theory. More precisely, there are two concepts of superselection rule, a weak and a strong one. Weak superselection rules exist both in orthodox quantum theory and in Bohm–Bell theories and represent the conventional understanding of superselection rules. We introduce the concept of strong superselection rule, which does not exist in orthodox quantum theory. It relies on the clear ontology of Bohm–Bell theories and is a sharper and, in the Bohm–Bell context, more fundamental notion. A strong superselection rule for the observable G asserts that one can replace every state vector by a suitable statistical mixture of eigenvectors of G without changing the particle trajectories or their probabilities. A weak superselection rule asserts that every state vector is empirically indistinguishable from a suitable statistical mixture of eigenvectors of G . We establish conditions on G for both kinds of superselection. For comparison, we also consider both kinds of superselection in theories of spontaneous wavefunction collapse.

arXiv:quant-ph/0509177•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General•Nov 30, 2006•17 citations
In quantum theory, physically measurable quantities of a microscopic system are represented by self-adjoint operators. However, not all of the self-adjoint operators correspond to measurable quantities. The superselection rule is a criterion to distinguish measurable quantities. Any measurable quantity must obey the superselection rules. By contraposition, any quantity which does not obey the superselection rules cannot be measured. Although some of superselection rules were proved, the raizon d'être of the superselection rules has been still obscure. In this paper we deduce the superselection rules from an assumption on symmetry property of measurement process. We introduce the notion of covariant indicator, which is a macroscopic observable whose value indicates the value of a microscopic object observable. We prove that if an object system has a quantity that is conserved during the measurement process, other quantities that do not commute with the conserved quantity are non-measurable by the covariant indicator. Our derivation of superselection rules is compared with the uncertainty relation under the restriction by a conservation law. An implication of the color superselection rule for the color confinement is discussed. It is also argued that spontaneous symmetry breaking enables a measurement that the superselection rule prohibits.
This thesis concerns how symmetries impinge on quantum mechanical measurements, and preclude certain self adjoint operators from representing observable quantities. After developing the requisite mathematical machinery and aspects of quantum measurement theory necessary for our analysis, we proceed to critically review the literature surrounding the remarkable theorem of Wigner, Araki and Yanase (WAY) that prohibits accurate and repeatable measurements of any observable not commuting with an additive conserved quantity, as well as discussing the conditions under which approximate measurements with approximate degrees of repeatability can be achieved. We strengthen the original statement of the WAY theorem and generalise it to the case of position measurements obeying momentum conservation, leading to a solution of a long-standing problem of Stein and Shimony. A superselection rule appearing as the existence of an observable which commutes with all others gives rise to a stronger restriction than the WAY theorem, yielding self adjoint operators which do not represent observable quantities. We analyse various perspectives on superselection rules, aiming to clarify different viewpoints appearing in the literature since the inception of the topic in 1952. We exploit an explicit description of relative phase observables which have been lacking in other contributions, delineating conditions under which relative and (prohibited) absolute phases become statistically close. By providing simple models we are able to mimic a number of attempts to overcome superselection rules, in order to highlight the generic features of such attempts. We show that the statistical proximity of absolute and relative quantities arises only when there is a highly localised phase reference, and that the superselection rule compatible relative phase factors between certain superpositions takes on the appearence of a forbidden relative phase factor in this limit. However, we argue that these relative phase factors can be determined fully within the confines of a superselection rule.
A superselection rule advanced in the course of a quantum-mechanical treatment of some phenomenon is an assertion to the effect that the superposition principle of quantum mechanics is to be restricted in the application at hand. Superselection accounts of measurement all have in common a decision to represent the indicator states of detectors by eigenspaces of superselection operators named in a superselection rule, on the grounds that the states in question are states of a so-called classical quantity and therefore not subject to quantum interference effects. By this strategy superselectionists of measurement expect to dispense with use of projection postulates in treatments of measurement. I shall argue that superselection accounts of measurement are self-contradictory, and that treatments of infinite systems, if they can avoid the contradiction, are not true superselection accounts.
The Hilbert-Space Description By the static description of a physical system we mean the rules that assign specified mathematical objects to the states and to the physical quantities of the system, and the prescriptions for calculating the probability distribution of the possible values of every physical quantity when the state of the system is given. In the usual Hilbert-space formulation of quantum mechanics, to each physical system is attached a separable Hilbert space (generally infinite-dimensional) over the complex field. To every physical quantity is associated a linear, self-adjoint, not necessarily bounded operator on. If one deals with a strictly quantum system, then the converse is also generally assumed: every self-adjoint operator on represents some physical quan- tity. The restriction “strictly quantum” is necessary: if the system retains some nonquantum (i.e. classical) feature, so that it requires the algorithm of so-called “superselection rules” (see Chapter 5), then there are self-adjoint operators on that do not represent physical quantities. It should also be stressed that even in the strictly quantum case, most of the self-adjoint operators actually do not represent “interesting” physical quantities: only a few of them represent physical quantities that are useful and meaningful for the description of the physical system (e.g., energy, momentum, position, angular momentum). Therefore, by asserting that every self-adjoint operator on corresponds to some physical quantity we mean there is no a priori impossibility of devising such a correspondence, but we do not claim that this correspondence is present in the real work of experimental physics.
The customary notion of superselection rule stipulates the vanishing of those matrix elements of the density matrix that connect states separated by the superselection rule, i.e., the relative phases of which are, according to the superselection rule, meaningless. It is shown that, if any two states for which an additive conserved quantity has different values are separated for all physical systems by a superselection rule at one time, the separation will persist for all times. It is concluded that the states with different electric (or baryonic) charges are so separated. The reason for the difference between electric charge and other additive conserved quantities, such as momentum, is brought out.
The meaning of superselection rules in Bohm–Bell theories (i.e., quantum theories with particle trajectories) is different from that in orthodox quantum theory. More precisely, there are two concepts of superselection rule, a weak and a strong one. Weak superselection rules exist both in orthodox quantum theory and in Bohm–Bell theories and represent the conventional understanding of superselection rules. We introduce the concept of strong superselection rule, which does not exist in orthodox quantum theory. It relies on the clear ontology of Bohm–Bell theories and is a sharper and, in the Bohm–Bell context, more fundamental notion. A strong superselection rule for the observable G asserts that one can replace every state vector by a suitable statistical mixture of eigenvectors of G without changing the particle trajectories or their probabilities. A weak superselection rule asserts that every state vector is empirically indistinguishable from a suitable statistical mixture of eigenvectors of G . We establish conditions on G for both kinds of superselection. For comparison, we also consider both kinds of superselection in theories of spontaneous wavefunction collapse.