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:1404.1555 · Acta Polytechnica

IS PT -SYMMETRIC QUANTUM THEORY FALSE AS A FUNDAMENTAL THEORY?

Miloslav Znojil

Published Jun 30, 2016• 10 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Yi-Chan Lee et al. claim (cf. Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 130404 (2014)) that the “recent extension of quantum theory to non-Hermitian Hamiltonians” (which is widely known under the nickname of “PT-symmetric quantum theory”) is “likely false as a fundamental theory”. By their opinion their results “essentially kill any hope of PT-symmetric quantum theory as a fundamental theory of nature”. In our present text we explain that their toy-model-based considerations are misleading and that they do not imply any similar conclusions.

DOI
10.14311/ap.2016.56.0254

Related papers

Local PT Symmetry Violates the No-Signaling Principle

Yi-Chan Lee, Min-Hsiu Hsieh, Steven T. Flammia +1 more

Bender et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 5243 (1998)] have developed PT-symmetric quantum theory as an extension of quantum theory to non-Hermitian Hamiltonians. We show that when this model has a local PT symmetry acting on composite systems, it violates the nonsignaling principle of relativity. Since the case of global PT symmetry is known to reduce to standard quantum mechanics A. Mostafazadeh [J. Math. Phys. 43, 205 (2001)], this shows that the PT-symmetric theory is either a trivial extension or likely false as a fundamental theory.

arXiv:1312.3395•Physical Review Letters•Apr 3, 2014•156 citations

Comment on ``PT-Symmetric versus Hermitian Formulations of Quantum Mechanics [hep-th/0511229]''

Mostafazadeh, Ali

We explain why the main conclusion of Bender et al, hep-th/0511229 [J. Phys. A 39 (2006) 1657] regarding the practical superiority of the non-Hermitian description of PT-symmetric quantum systems over their Hermitian description is not valid. Recalling the essential role played by the Hermitian description in the characterization and interpretation of the physical observables, we maintain that as far as the physical aspects of the theory are concerned the Hermitian description is not only unavoidable but also indispensable.

arXiv:hep-th/0603059•Mar 8, 2006•2 citations

A Critique of PT-Symmetric Quantum Mechanics

Mostafazadeh, Ali

We study the physical content of the PT-symmetric complex extension of quantum mechanics as proposed in Bender et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 5243 (1998) and 89, 270401 (2002), and show that as a fundamental probabilistic physical theory it is neither an alternative to nor an extension of ordinary quantum mechanics. We demonstrate that the definition of a physical observable given in the above papers is inconsistent with the dynamical aspect of the theory and offer a consistent notion of an observable.

arXiv:quant-ph/0310164•Oct 28, 2003•8 citations

Reply to the Comment on ‘The operational foundations of PT-symmetric and quasi-Hermitian quantum theory’

Abhijeet Alase, Salini Karuvade, Carlo Maria Scandolo

Abstract This document is our reply to the Comment (Miloslav Znojil 2023 J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 56 038001) on our recent work titled ‘The operational foundations of PT-symmetric and quasi-Hermitian quantum theory’. The original Comment consists of three addenda to our work. The first addendum claims that our work is ill-motivated as the motivating question, namely whether PT-symmetric quantum theory extends the standard quantum theory, was already answered in the literature. The second addendum points to some missing references in our work, and the third addendum suggests what constraints could lead to an extension of standard quantum theory. In our reply, we explain that the claim in the first addendum is a result of a misinterpretation of our motivating question. When interpreted correctly, the third addendum in the Comment in itself elaborates on why our motivating question is interesting and relevant. We also briefly comment on the prospects of an extension of standard quantum theory along the lines suggested in the third addendum. As our response to the second addendum, we explain our rationale behind citing certain references while leaving out others.

arXiv:2303.14890•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical•Apr 4, 2023•0 citations

Comment on letter "Local {$\mathcal{PT}$} symmetry violates the no-signaling principle" by Yi-Chan Lee et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 130404 (2014)

Miloslav Znojil

It is shown that the toy-model-based considerations of {\em loc. cit.} (see also arXiv:1312.3395) are based on an incorrect, manifestly unphysical choice of the Hilbert space of admissible quantum states. A two-parametric family of all of the eligible correct and potentially physical Hilbert spaces of the model is then constructed. The implications of this construction are discussed. In particular, it is emphasized that contrary to the conclusions of {\em loc. cit.} there is no reason to believe that the current form of the $\mathcal{PT}$-symmetric quantum theory should be false as a fundamental theory.

•Apr 6, 2014•0 citations

PT quantum mechanics - Recent results

Carl M. Bender

Most quantum physicists believe that a quantum-mechanical Hamiltonian must be Dirac Hermitian (invariant under matrix transposition and complex conjugation) to be sure that the energy eigenvalues are real and that time evolution is unitary. However, the non-Dirac-hermitian Hamiltonian H = p2+ix3 has a real positive discrete spectrum and generates unitary time evolution and defines a fully consistent and physical quantum theory. Evidently, Dirac Hermiticity is too restrictive. While H = p2+ix3 is not Dirac Hermitian, it is PT symmetric (invariant under combined space reflection P and time reversal T). Another PT-symmetric Hamiltonian whose energy levels are real, positive and discrete is H = p2−x4, which contains an upside-down potential. The quantum mechanics defined by a PT-symmetric Hamiltonian is a complex generalization of ordinary quantum mechanics. When quantum mechanics and quantum field theory are extended into the complex domain, new kinds of theories having strange and remarkable properties emerge. In the past two years some of these properties have been verified in laboratory experiments. Here, we first discuss PT-symmetric Hamiltonians at a simple intuitive level and explain why the energy levels of such Hamiltonians may be real, positive, and discrete. Second, we describe a recent experiment in which the PT phase transition was observed. Third, we briefly mention that PT-symmetric theories can be useful at a fundamental level. While the double-scaling limit of an O(N)-symmetric gφ4 quantum field theory appears to be inconsistent because the critical value of g is negative, this limit is in fact not inconsistent because the critical theory is PT symmetric.

AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2012•3 citations
Yi-Chan Lee et al. claim (cf. Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 130404 (2014)) that the “recent extension of quantum theory to non-Hermitian Hamiltonians” (which is widely known under the nickname of “PT-symmetric quantum theory”) is “likely false as a fundamental theory”. By their opinion their results “essentially kill any hope of PT-symmetric quantum theory as a fundamental theory of nature”. In our present text we explain that their toy-model-based considerations are misleading and that they do not imply any similar conclusions.
Bender et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 5243 (1998)] have developed PT-symmetric quantum theory as an extension of quantum theory to non-Hermitian Hamiltonians. We show that when this model has a local PT symmetry acting on composite systems, it violates the nonsignaling principle of relativity. Since the case of global PT symmetry is known to reduce to standard quantum mechanics A. Mostafazadeh [J. Math. Phys. 43, 205 (2001)], this shows that the PT-symmetric theory is either a trivial extension or likely false as a fundamental theory.
We explain why the main conclusion of Bender et al, hep-th/0511229 [J. Phys. A 39 (2006) 1657] regarding the practical superiority of the non-Hermitian description of PT-symmetric quantum systems over their Hermitian description is not valid. Recalling the essential role played by the Hermitian description in the characterization and interpretation of the physical observables, we maintain that as far as the physical aspects of the theory are concerned the Hermitian description is not only unavoidable but also indispensable.
We study the physical content of the PT-symmetric complex extension of quantum mechanics as proposed in Bender et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 5243 (1998) and 89, 270401 (2002), and show that as a fundamental probabilistic physical theory it is neither an alternative to nor an extension of ordinary quantum mechanics. We demonstrate that the definition of a physical observable given in the above papers is inconsistent with the dynamical aspect of the theory and offer a consistent notion of an observable.
Abstract This document is our reply to the Comment (Miloslav Znojil 2023 J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 56 038001) on our recent work titled ‘The operational foundations of PT-symmetric and quasi-Hermitian quantum theory’. The original Comment consists of three addenda to our work. The first addendum claims that our work is ill-motivated as the motivating question, namely whether PT-symmetric quantum theory extends the standard quantum theory, was already answered in the literature. The second addendum points to some missing references in our work, and the third addendum suggests what constraints could lead to an extension of standard quantum theory. In our reply, we explain that the claim in the first addendum is a result of a misinterpretation of our motivating question. When interpreted correctly, the third addendum in the Comment in itself elaborates on why our motivating question is interesting and relevant. We also briefly comment on the prospects of an extension of standard quantum theory along the lines suggested in the third addendum. As our response to the second addendum, we explain our rationale behind citing certain references while leaving out others.
Comment on letter "Local {PT\mathcal{PT}PT} symmetry violates the no-signaling principle" by Yi-Chan Lee et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 130404 (2014)
It is shown that the toy-model-based considerations of {\em loc. cit.} (see also arXiv:1312.3395) are based on an incorrect, manifestly unphysical choice of the Hilbert space of admissible quantum states. A two-parametric family of all of the eligible correct and potentially physical Hilbert spaces of the model is then constructed. The implications of this construction are discussed. In particular, it is emphasized that contrary to the conclusions of {\em loc. cit.} there is no reason to believe that the current form of the PT\mathcal{PT}PT-symmetric quantum theory should be false as a fundamental theory.
Most quantum physicists believe that a quantum-mechanical Hamiltonian must be Dirac Hermitian (invariant under matrix transposition and complex conjugation) to be sure that the energy eigenvalues are real and that time evolution is unitary. However, the non-Dirac-hermitian Hamiltonian H = p2+ix3 has a real positive discrete spectrum and generates unitary time evolution and defines a fully consistent and physical quantum theory. Evidently, Dirac Hermiticity is too restrictive. While H = p2+ix3 is not Dirac Hermitian, it is PT symmetric (invariant under combined space reflection P and time reversal T). Another PT-symmetric Hamiltonian whose energy levels are real, positive and discrete is H = p2−x4, which contains an upside-down potential. The quantum mechanics defined by a PT-symmetric Hamiltonian is a complex generalization of ordinary quantum mechanics. When quantum mechanics and quantum field theory are extended into the complex domain, new kinds of theories having strange and remarkable properties emerge. In the past two years some of these properties have been verified in laboratory experiments. Here, we first discuss PT-symmetric Hamiltonians at a simple intuitive level and explain why the energy levels of such Hamiltonians may be real, positive, and discrete. Second, we describe a recent experiment in which the PT phase transition was observed. Third, we briefly mention that PT-symmetric theories can be useful at a fundamental level. While the double-scaling limit of an O(N)-symmetric gφ4 quantum field theory appears to be inconsistent because the critical value of g is negative, this limit is in fact not inconsistent because the critical theory is PT symmetric.