Quantum mechanics is reformulated using Hartle's definition of the state of an individual physical system and a variant of von Neumann's propositional calculus. An elementary set of quantum postulates lead inductively to the familiar formulas of quantum theory, including the canonical commutation relation and Schrödinger's equation. The expected value of the frequency of events for an ideal ensemble is equal to the expected value of a state operator for an individual system, producing a binomial probability distribution for the determination of indefinite experimental propositions.
Quantum mechanics is reformulated using Hartle's definition of the state of an individual physical system and a variant of von Neumann's propositional calculus. An elementary set of quantum postulates lead inductively to the familiar formulas of quantum theory, including the canonical commutation relation and Schrödinger's equation. The expected value of the frequency of events for an ideal ensemble is equal to the expected value of a state operator for an individual system, producing a binomial probability distribution for the determination of indefinite experimental propositions.
To my friend and mentor, Professor Attilio Rigamonti. Unperformed experiments have no results. Asher Peres Introduction More than a century after its birth, quantum mechanics (QM) remains mysterious. We still don't have general principles from which to derive its remarkable mathematical framework, as happened for the amazing Lorentz transformations, which were rederived by Einstein from the invariance of physical laws in inertial frames and from the constancy of the speed of light. Despite the utmost relevance of the problem of deriving QM from operational principles, research efforts in this direction have been sporadic. The deepest of the early attacks on the problem were the works of Birkhoff, von Neumann, Jordan, and Wigner, attempting to derive QM from a set of axioms with as much physical significance as possible. The general idea in Ref. is to regard QM as a new kind of prepositional calculus , a proposal that spawned the research line of quantum logic , which is based on von Neumann's observation that the two-valued observables – represented in his formulation of QM by orthogonal projection operators – constitute a kind of “logic” of experimental propositions. After a hiatus of two decades of neglect, interest in quantum logic was revived by Varadarajan, and most notably by Mackey, who axiomatized QM within an operational framework, with the single exception of an admittedly ad hoc postulate, which represents the propositional calculus mathematically in the form of an orthomodular lattice. The most significant extension of Mackey's work is the general representation theorem of Piron.
Quantum mechanics is usually described in the terminology of probability theory even though the properties of the probability spaces associated with it are fundamentally different from the standard ones of probability theory. For example, Kolmogorov's axioms are not general enough to encompass the non-commutative situations that arise in quantum theory. There have been many attempts to generalise these axioms to meet the needs of quantum mechanics. The focus of these attempts has been the observation, first made by Birkhoff and von Neumann (1936), that the propositions associated with a quantum-mechanical system do not form a Boolean σ-algebra. There is almost universal agreement that the probability space associated with a quantum-mechanical system is given by the set of subspaces of a separable Hilbert space, but there is disagreement over the algebraic structure that this set represents. In the most popular model for the probability space of quantum mechanics the propositions are assumed to form an orthocomplemented lattice (Mackey (1963), Jauch (1968)). The fundamental concept here is that of a partial order, that is a binary relation that is reflexive and transitive but not symmetric. The partial order is interpreted as embodying the logical concept of implication in the set of propositions associated with the physical system. Although this model provides an acceptable mathematical expression of the probabilistic structure of quantum mechanics in that the subspaces of a separable Hilbert space give a representation of an ortho-complemented lattice, it has several deficiencies which will be discussed later.
In this chapter the basic concepts of quantum theory are formulated via a self-consistent set of six postulates. These six postulates deal with the following: operator images of physical observables; properties of state vectors and wave functions; the connection with experimental measurements; coordinate-space forms of those operators having classical analogs; the primary dynamical equation of quantum mechanics; and the completeness of the eigenvectors of observables. The postulates are the framework on which the edifice of quantum mechanics is constructed. A separate section is devoted to the statement of each postulate and to a few examples chosen to illustrate or apply it. A comprehensive set of applications is presented in Chapters 6 and 7, where various 1-D systems are used as the vehicles for illustrating the postulates. The basic theory of this chapter is extended and developed in Chapters 8 and 9. Since probability is a key interpretational concept, a brief introduction to this topic is given in an appendix. We emphasize that our formulation of quantum theory (in this chapter and throughout this book) is restricted to the case of pure states. This is not a major restriction. It means that, when we consider ensembles of individual quantum systems (e.g., single particles, atoms, nuclei, etc.), all of the systems in the ensemble are assumed to be in the same quantum state, not necessarily an eigenstate of a quantal operator. Ensembles for which this assumption does not hold are described by a density operator or density matrix rather than by a pure state; treatments of such cases can be found in references cited later.
Most of the predictions of quantum mechanics are of a statistical nature and therefore make sense only for ensembles. The axiomatics based on the quantum calculus of propositions might open the way toward a general definition of the quantum state of an individual system. It was soon recognized that this leads to separability and thereby to violation of some of the quantum-mechanical predictions. In contemporary literature, the concept of state is not wholly unambiguous. Some authors associate it with the notion of an individual system and say, for instance that a given system is in a given state. Others associate it exclusively with ensembles. The situation is complicated by the fact that for some theorists the concept of state refers only to ensembles that can be described by some state vector. For other authors it refers just as well to ensembles that cannot be associated with any state vector and for which only a density matrix description is therefore acceptable.
Abstract Birkhoff and von Neumann make it clear what the goal of their October, 1936 paper, “The logic of quantum mechanics”, is: “The object of the present paper is to discover what logical structure one may hope to find in physical theories which, like quantum mechanics, do not conform to classical logic. Our main conclusion, based on admittedly heuristic arguments, is that one can reasonably expect to find a calculus of propositions which is formally indistinguishable from the calculus of linear subspaces with respect to set products, linear sums, and orthogonal complements-and resembles the usual calculus of propositions with respect to and, or, and not.” (Birkhoff and von Neumann, 1936, p.823; underline added). Specifically, “Up to now, we have only discussed formal features of logical structure which seem to be common to classical dynamics and the quantum theory. We now turn to the central difference between them-the distributive identity of the propositional calculus: L6: a U (b ꓵ c) = (a U b) ꓵ (a U c) and a ꓵ (b U c) = (a ꓵ b) U (a ꓵ c) which is a law in classical, but not in quantum mechanics.” (Birkhoff and von Neumann, 1936, p.830; underline added) Continuing, Birkhoff and von Neumann comment: “From a deeper mathematical viewpoint, L6 is the characteristic property of set-combination. More precisely, every "field" of sets is isomorphic with a Boolean algebra, and conversely.21 This throws new light on the well-known fact that the propositional calculi of classical mechanics are Boolean algebras.” (Birkhoff and von Neumann, 1936, p.831). Birkhoff and von Neumann then show on p.831 that the distributive law breaks down in quantum mechanics and that the generalized distributive law of logic breaks down in the related field “in the quotient algebra of the field of Lebesgue measurable sets by the ideal of sets of Lebesgue measure 0, which is so fundamental in statistics and the formulation of the ergodic principle.” (ibid., p.831). However, it must be noted that Birkhoff and von Neumann are talking about the Jevons-Pierce-Schroder interpretation (two -valued) of Boole’s original approach (four -valued), which Boole completely rejected. (See Hailperin, 1986, 1996), The reason for this rejection is that the Jevons-Peircean approach required strict complementation, which translated into additivity and linearity in probability assessments, as opposed to Boole’s realization that real world decision making required sub additivity and non-linearity, Thereafter, we will refer to the Jevons-Pierce-Schroder approach as Jevons’s approach to the interpretation of Boolean logic, which uses standard classical logic to underpin discussions of standard probability logic. Jevons’s approach removed the basic algebra which Boole combined with his new relational, propositional logic, so as to deal with indeterminate, imprecise probabilities, which are nonstandard. Jevons’s approach can’t deal with the non-standard probability logics used by Boole in chapters XVIII-XX of The Laws of Thought (1854) and by Keynes in chapters XII, XV-XVII of the A Treatise on Probability (1921) in order to deal with indeterminate, interval valued probabilities.
de Broglie-Bohm theory (dBBT), treating quantum particles as point objects moving along well defined (Bohmian) trajectories, offers an appealing solution of the measurement problem in quantum mechanics; it has, however, problems relating to spin, relativity and lack of proper integration with the Hilbert space based framework. In this work, we present a consistent formalism which has the traditional state-observable framework integrated with the desirable features of dBBT. We adopt ensemble interpretation for the Schrodinger wave function ψ. Given a Schrodinger wave function ψ, we use its value ψ0 at some fixed time (say, t=0) to define the probability measure ∣ψ0∣2dx on the system configuration space M (=Rn). On the resulting probability space M0, we introduce a stochastic process ξ(t) corresponding to the Heisenberg position operator XH(t) such that, in the Heisenberg state ∣ψh⟩ corresponding to ψ0, the expectation value of XH(t) equals that of ξ(t) in M0. This condition leads to the de Broglie-Bohm guidance equation for the sample paths of the process ξ(t) which are, therefore, Bohmian trajectories supposedly representing time-evolutions of individual members of the ψ0-ensemble. Stochastic processes and Bohmian trajectories corresponding to observables with discrete eigenvalues (in particular spin) are treated by extending the configuration space to the spectral space of the commutative algebra obtained by adding appropriate discrete observables to the position observables. Pauli's equation is treated as an example. A straightforward derivation of von Neumann's projection rule employing the Schrodinger-Bohm evolution of individual systems along their Bohmian trajectories is given. Some comments on the potential application of the formalism developed here to quantum mechanics of the universe are included.