It is known that non-commuting observables in quantum mechanics do not have joint probability. This statement refers to the precise (additive) probability model. I show that the joint distribution of any non-commuting pair of variables can be quantified via upper and lower probabilities, i.e. the joint probability is described by an interval instead of a number (imprecise probability). I propose transparent axioms from which the upper and lower probability operators follow. The imprecise probability depend on the non-commuting observables, is linear over the state (density matrix) and reverts to the usual expression for commuting observables.
It is known that non-commuting observables in quantum mechanics do not have joint probability. This statement refers to the precise (additive) probability model. I show that the joint distribution of any non-commuting pair of variables can be quantified via upper and lower probabilities, i.e. the joint probability is described by an interval instead of a number (imprecise probability). I propose transparent axioms from which the upper and lower probability operators follow. The imprecise probability depend on the non-commuting observables, is linear over the state (density matrix) and reverts to the usual expression for commuting observables.
Quantum non-locality is normally defined via violations of Bell's inequalities that exclude certain classical hidden variable theories from explaining quantum correlations. Another definition of non-locality refers to the wave function collapse thereby one can prepare a quantum state from arbitrary far away. In both cases one can debate on whether non-locality is a real physical phenomenon, e.g. , one can employ formulations of quantum mechanics that do not use collapse, or one can simply refrain from explaining quantum correlations via classical hidden variables. Here we point out that there is a non-local effect within quantum mechanics, i.e. , without involving hidden variables or collapse. This effect is seen via imprecise ( i.e. , interval-valued) joint probability of two observables, which replaces the ill-defined notion of the precise joint probability for non-commuting observables. It is consistent with all requirements for the joint probability, e.g. , those for commuting observales. The non-locality amounts to a fact that (in a two-particle system) the joint imprecise probability of non-commuting two-particle observables ( i.e. , tensor product of single-particle observables) does not factorize into single-particle contributions, even for uncorrelated states of the two-particle system. The factorization is recovered for a less precise ( i.e. , the one involving a wider interval) joint probability. This approach to non-locality reconciles it with locality, since the latter emerges as a less precise description.
In his entry on "Quantum Logic and Probability Theory" in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Alexander Wilce (2012) writes that "it is uncontroversial (though remarkable) the formal apparatus quantum mechanics reduces neatly to a generalization of classical probability in which the role played by a Boolean algebra of events in the latter is taken over the 'quantum logic' of projection operators on a Hilbert space." For a long time, Patrick Suppes has opposed this view (see, for example, the paper collected in Suppes and Zanotti (1996). Instead of changing the logic and moving from a Boolean algebra to a non-Boolean algebra, one can also 'save the phenomena' by weakening the axioms of probability theory and work instead with upper and lower probabilities. However, it is fair to say that despite Suppes' efforts upper and lower probabilities are not particularly popular in physics as well as in the foundations of physics, at least so far. Instead, quantum logic is booming again, especially since quantum information and computation became hot topics. Interestingly, however, imprecise probabilities are becoming more and more popular in formal epistemology as recent work by authors such as James Joye (2010) and Roger White (2010) demonstrates.
Quantum theory does not provide a unique definition for the joint probability of two noncommuting observables, which is the next important question after the Born's probability for a single observable. Instead, various definitions were suggested, e.g., via quasiprobabilities or via hidden-variable theories. After reviewing open issues of the joint probability, we relate it to quantum imprecise probabilities, which are noncontextual and are consistent with all constraints expected from a quantum probability. We study two noncommuting observables in a two-dimensional Hilbert space and show that there is no precise joint probability that applies for any quantum state and is consistent with imprecise probabilities. This contrasts with theorems by Bell and Kochen-Specker that exclude joint probabilities for more than two noncommuting observables, in Hilbert space with dimension larger than two. If measurement contexts are included into the definition, joint probabilities are not excluded anymore, but they are still constrained by imprecise probabilities.
Quantum mechanics does not permit joint measurements of non-commuting observables.However, it is possible to measure the weak value of a projection operator, followed by the precise measurement of a different property.The results can be interpreted as complex joint probabilities of the two non-commuting measurement outcomes.Significantly, it is possible to predict the outcome of completely different measurements by combining the joint probabilities of the initial state with complex conditional probabilities relating the new measurement to the possible combinations of measurement outcomes used in the characterization of the quantum state.We can therefore conclude that the complex conditional probabilities observed in weak measurements describe fundamental state-independent relations between non-commuting properties that represent the most fundamental form of universal laws in quantum physics.
We examine the construction of joint probabilities for non-commuting observables. We show that there are indications in standard quantum mechanics that imply the existence of conditional expectation values, which in turn implies the existence of a joint distribution. We also argue that the uncertainty principle has no bearing on the existence of joint distributions but only constrains the marginal distributions. In addition, we show that within classical probability theory there are mathematical quantities that are similar to quantum mechanical wave functions. This is shown by generalising a theorem of Khinchin on the necessary and sufficient conditions for a function to be a characteristic function.
This paper explores the limitations of Kolmogorov's measure-theoretic foundation of probability in the context of quantum mechanics and proposes an extension towards a non-commutative framework. We delve into the mathematical structures underlying quantum probability spaces, focusing on operator algebras and their associated states. We analyze the challenges in defining joint probabilities for non-commuting observables and present an overview of alternative approaches based on operator algebras, quantum logic, and non-commutative integration. Furthermore, we investigate the applications of non-commutative measure theory in quantum information theory, quantum field theory, and the foundations of quantum mechanics, highlighting the potential for a more comprehensive understanding of probabilistic phenomena in quantum systems.