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:1412.2177 · Entropy

The Many Classical Faces of Quantum Structures

Chris Heunen

Published Mar 29, 2017• 15 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Interpretational problems with quantum mechanics can be phrased precisely by only talking about empirically accessible information. This prompts a mathematical reformulation of quantum mechanics in terms of classical mechanics. We survey this programme in terms of algebraic quantum theory.
DOI
10.3390/e19040144

Related papers

Algebraic Structures of Quantum Physics

Robert Murray Jones

We examine a series of developments in mathematics used in quantum physics. These include Hilbert space. We then examine how several developments in mathematics can be used in application to Quantum physics.

Open Journal of Philosophy•Jan 1, 2021•0 citations

Geometric quantization and algebraic Lagrangian geometry

Nikolai Andreevich Tyurin

Introduction The main theme of this survey is the quantization of classical mechanical systems in terms of algebraic geometry. The aim is thus to relate questions of mathematics and theoretical physics. We first recall briefly the main problems and methods which turn us to study the new subject. Quantization itself is the main problem of theoretical physics. The need to introduce and develop it was dictated by the creators of quantum theory. According to the ‘Copenhagen philosophy’, the physical predictions of a quantum theory must be formulated in terms of classical concepts (the first sentence of Woodhouse; here we quote the beginning of this survey). Thus in addition to the usual structures (Hilbert space, unitary transformations, selfadjoint operators …, see, for example, Landau and Lifschitz) any reasonable quantum theory has to admit an appropriate passage to a classical limit under which quantum observables are transferred to their classical analogues. However, as Dirac pointed out at the beginning of the quantum age, the correspondence between quantum theory and classical theory should be based not just on numerical coincidences taking place in the limit h → ∞, but on an analogy between their mathematical structures. Classical theory does approximate the quantum theory, but it does more – it supplies a framework for some interpretation of quantum theory. Using this idea, we can in general understand a quantization procedure as a correspondence between classical and quantum theories. In this sense, quantization of the classical mechanical systems is a movement in one direction, while taking the quasiclassical limit goes in the opposite direction.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Jan 18, 2007•15 citations

The formalisms and interpretations of quantum mechanics

Kefu Zhu

This chapter, based on the background information of the previous chapter, will review the formalism of quantum mechanics – its fundamental mathematical structure (the basic contents of Hilbert space representation and operator algebra representation) and physical assumptions (kinematics, dynamics, and measurement theory). These are the premise and foundation for discussing the quantum histories interpretation. Then, in combination with the viewpoints of some literature in recent years, we will explore what is the interpretation of quantum mechanics, analyze the relationship between the theory of quantum mechanics and its interpretation, and declare the author’s basic stance on these two issues. These two are the primary issues that all interpretive work in the philosophy of physics will face (not limited to the interpretation of quantum mechanics), and the necessary clarification here is also conducive to the subsequent discussion. Three common terms – theory, formalism, and interpretation – are explicated and differentiated by offering the necessary definitions of their meanings, based on the works of Acuña and Ruetsche. The clarification will help to make the subsequent related discussions more precise.

Routledge eBooks•Aug 22, 2025•0 citations

Foundations of quantum mechanics?

Göran Lindblad

Does quantum mechanics have unsolved foundational problems? Is there a dividing line between the quantum and classical descriptions of the world? In this paper, I give an elementary introduction to the mathematical aspects of quantum and classical models which have prompted such questions.

Physica Scripta•Jun 28, 2011•30 citations

The philosophical problems of implementing superselection rules

Jorge Manero

Some physicists believe that superselection rules should be implemented to get rid of inconsistencies when a theory is framed in terms of a new mathematical formulation, whilst others think that this new formulation should be modified instead of implementing those rules, at the expense of introducing additional mathematical structure. The outcome, however, is that we are still uncertain whether these rules should be implemented and how they should be interpreted and assessed from the philosophical point of view. Based on a detailed examination of the group-theoretic reformulation of (relativistic and non-relativistic) quantum mechanics that prompts physicists to impose superselection rules, I shall argue that the implementation of these rules involves serious heuristic and epistemological concerns. Considering this argument, I shall conclude that there are suitable philosophical reasons to claim that the implementation of superselection rules should be rejected and that there are certain circumstances when the formulation of a theory should be modified.

arXiv:2310.03014•Oct 4, 2023•0 citations

Review of the algebraic foundations of quantum mechanics

Antonino Drago

Pisa University Press eBooks•Jan 1, 2021•0 citations
Introduction The main theme of this survey is the quantization of classical mechanical systems in terms of algebraic geometry. The aim is thus to relate questions of mathematics and theoretical physics. We first recall briefly the main problems and methods which turn us to study the new subject. Quantization itself is the main problem of theoretical physics. The need to introduce and develop it was dictated by the creators of quantum theory. According to the ‘Copenhagen philosophy’, the physical predictions of a quantum theory must be formulated in terms of classical concepts (the first sentence of Woodhouse; here we quote the beginning of this survey). Thus in addition to the usual structures (Hilbert space, unitary transformations, selfadjoint operators …, see, for example, Landau and Lifschitz) any reasonable quantum theory has to admit an appropriate passage to a classical limit under which quantum observables are transferred to their classical analogues. However, as Dirac pointed out at the beginning of the quantum age, the correspondence between quantum theory and classical theory should be based not just on numerical coincidences taking place in the limit h → ∞, but on an analogy between their mathematical structures. Classical theory does approximate the quantum theory, but it does more – it supplies a framework for some interpretation of quantum theory. Using this idea, we can in general understand a quantization procedure as a correspondence between classical and quantum theories. In this sense, quantization of the classical mechanical systems is a movement in one direction, while taking the quasiclassical limit goes in the opposite direction.
This chapter, based on the background information of the previous chapter, will review the formalism of quantum mechanics – its fundamental mathematical structure (the basic contents of Hilbert space representation and operator algebra representation) and physical assumptions (kinematics, dynamics, and measurement theory). These are the premise and foundation for discussing the quantum histories interpretation. Then, in combination with the viewpoints of some literature in recent years, we will explore what is the interpretation of quantum mechanics, analyze the relationship between the theory of quantum mechanics and its interpretation, and declare the author’s basic stance on these two issues. These two are the primary issues that all interpretive work in the philosophy of physics will face (not limited to the interpretation of quantum mechanics), and the necessary clarification here is also conducive to the subsequent discussion. Three common terms – theory, formalism, and interpretation – are explicated and differentiated by offering the necessary definitions of their meanings, based on the works of Acuña and Ruetsche. The clarification will help to make the subsequent related discussions more precise.
Some physicists believe that superselection rules should be implemented to get rid of inconsistencies when a theory is framed in terms of a new mathematical formulation, whilst others think that this new formulation should be modified instead of implementing those rules, at the expense of introducing additional mathematical structure. The outcome, however, is that we are still uncertain whether these rules should be implemented and how they should be interpreted and assessed from the philosophical point of view. Based on a detailed examination of the group-theoretic reformulation of (relativistic and non-relativistic) quantum mechanics that prompts physicists to impose superselection rules, I shall argue that the implementation of these rules involves serious heuristic and epistemological concerns. Considering this argument, I shall conclude that there are suitable philosophical reasons to claim that the implementation of superselection rules should be rejected and that there are certain circumstances when the formulation of a theory should be modified.