The long lasting discussion on the completeness of quantum theory (QT) has not yet come to an end. The discussion is impeded by the lack of a clear understanding of what makes up the contents of a theory of physics in general and of QT specifically. After such an understanding has been developed, a more precise definition of global properties, such as the completeness, computability, and extensibility of a theory, is possible and necessary. This paper addresses these subjects for theories of physics and, in particular, for QT. The basis for the definition of the completeness of a theory is the proposed definition of a "formal causal model of a physical theory". The formal model can be applied to discussions of general attributes, such as completeness, computability, and extensibility.
The long lasting discussion on the completeness of quantum theory (QT) has not yet come to an end. The discussion is impeded by the lack of a clear understanding of what makes up the contents of a theory of physics in general and of QT specifically. After such an understanding has been developed, a more precise definition of global properties, such as the completeness, computability, and extensibility of a theory, is possible and necessary. This paper addresses these subjects for theories of physics and, in particular, for QT. The basis for the definition of the completeness of a theory is the proposed definition of a "formal causal model of a physical theory". The formal model can be applied to discussions of general attributes, such as completeness, computability, and extensibility.
Quantum theory (QT) provides statistical predictions for various physical phenomena. To verify these predictions a considerable amount of data has been accumulated in the 'measurements' performed on the ensembles of identically prepared physical systems or in the repeated 'measurements' on some trapped 'individual physical systems'. The outcomes of these measurements are, in general, some numerical time series registered by some macroscopic instruments. The various empirical probability distributions extracted from these time series were shown to be consistent with the probabilistic predictions of QT. More than 70 years ago the claim was made that QT provided the most complete description of 'individual' physical systems and outcomes of the measurements performed on 'individual' physical systems were obtained in an intrinsically random way. Spin polarization correlation experiments (SPCEs), performed to test the validity of Bell inequalities, clearly demonstrated the existence of strong long-range correlations and confirmed that the beams hitting far away detectors somehow preserve the memory of their common source which would be destroyed if the individual counts of far away detectors were purely random. Since the probabilities describe the random experiments and are not the attributes of the 'individual' physical systems, the claim that QT provides a complete description of 'individual' physical systems seems not only unjustified but also misleading and counter productive. In this paper, we point out that we even do not know whether QT is predictably complete because it has not been tested carefully enough. Namely, it was not proven that the time series of existing experimental data did not contain some stochastic fine structures that could have been averaged out by describing them in terms of the empirical probability distributions. In this paper, we advocate various statistical tests that could be used to search for such fine structures in the data and to answer the title question of this paper. In our opinion a proper understanding of the statistical character of QT and of its limitations is crucial in the domains such as quantum optics and quantum information.
This article presents an analysis of the extent to which local causal models or local realistic models of quantum theory (QT), including quantum field theory (QFT), are theoretically possible and practically feasible in light of the present state of these theories. Quantum physicists consider Bells famous inequality and its violation in experiments to be a strong indication that local realistic or local causal models of QT are not possible and that quantum theory as a whole is therefore not a local realistic or local causal theory. Based on a proposed definition of a "formal causal model" for a theory of physics (such as QT), this paper investigates the possibility of having a local causal model for QT. Areas of QT are identified in which the construction of a causal model is impeded because of deficiencies in the state of the respective theory. It is shown that the removal of the deficiencies can be achieved by the provision of a causal model. Whereas the construction of a causal model of QT, including QFT, appears to be feasible after the removal of certain deficiencies, the construction of a local (causal) model does not appear to be possible. As a consequence of the conclusion that local (causal) models of QT/QFT are not possible, if a strong interpretation of locality is assumed, a locality model is proposed in which the non-localities are confined to "quantum objects".
Quantum mechanics has achieved unparalleled success as an operational theory, describing a wide range of experiments to remarkable accuracy. However, the physical foundations on which it rests remain as puzzling as they were a century ago, and a concise statement of the physical principles that underlie quantum mechanics is still outstanding. One promising approach holds that these principles should be formulated in terms of information, since many of the counter-intuitive effects in quantum theory concern questions such as what one can know about a quantum system and how the information encoded therein can be processed and distributed between parties. Another challenging feature of quantum theory is its incompatibility with the other cornerstone of modern physics, general relativity. In order to reconcile the two, one must identify and retain only the essential concepts and principles of each theory, and in the case of general relativity, causality has been identified as such a concept. This raises the question of how our classical understanding of causality must change when quantum theory is taken into account. In order to address these questions about information, knowledge and causality, I turn to the framework of causal models. In classical statistics, causal models explain the relations among a set of variables in terms of causal influences, which makes them a powerful tool for structuring our knowledge about complex systems and developing strategies for interacting with them. More importantly, the framework provides the conceptual underpinnings and mathematical methods for addressing questions about causation, information and knowledge in a rigorous manner. In this thesis, I develop a version of the classical causal models framework that is compatible with quantum theory and explore its physical implications. \n \n \nA first step is to define quantum versions of fundamental elements such as variables, conditionals and belief propagation rules. This allows one to consider the question of what one can come to know about a quantum variable from the point of view of causal modelling. The conditionals relating quantum variables are found to have a richer structure than their classical counterparts, which can be exploited for the task of discerning causal relations given limited data -- a central problem in classical causal modelling. The mathematical properties of quantum conditionals also establish a correspondence between various classes of two-party correlations, such as bound and distillable entanglement, and the types of causal structures that can give rise to them, which may become a useful tool for entanglement theory and quantum information processing. In the context of open quantum systems dynamics, quantum causal models provide a clear physical explanation of not completely positive maps and, more broadly, of non-Markovian quantum dynamics. Finally, I consider the possibility of non-classical effects in the way that different causal mechanisms are combined -- that is, non-classical causal structures. For the simple case of two causally ordered variables, I propose indicators that witness different classes of combinations of causal mechanisms, including a non-classical mixture, and describe an experiment realizing examples of the different classes. \n \n \nAs these results illustrate, the framework of quantum causal models provides both greater conceptual clarity and a comprehensive mathematical formalism for studying a diverse set of problems, ranging from foundational questions to applications in open systems dynamics and the exploration of non-classical causal structures, which are likely to feature in a future theory of quantum gravity. The material presented in this thesis is intended as a foundation and inspiration for further applications of quantum causal models.
Quantum mechanics is a cornerstone of our current understanding of nature and extremely successful in describing physics covering a huge range of scales. However, its interpretation remains controversial since the early days of quantum mechanics. What does a quantum state really mean? Is there any way out of the so-called quantum measurement problem? Here, we present an information-complete quantum theory (ICQT) and the trinary property of nature to beat the above problems. We assume that a quantum system’s state provides an information-complete description of the system in the trinary picture. We present a consistent formalism of quantum theory that makes the information-completeness explicitly and argue that conventional quantum mechanics is an approximation of the ICQT. We then show how our ICQT provides a coherent picture and fresh angle of some existing problems in physics. The computational content of our theory is uncovered by defining an information-complete quantum computer.
A simplified scheme is used to discuss the idea of the mathematical formalism of physical theory. The physical theory is associated with a certain mathematical structure which makes it possible to define objects, i.e., the subject of investigation, and some of their characteristics. The task of the theory is to find the characteristics of an object from its input data that implicitly define it, on the basis of the laws from the nature of the basic structure. It stands to reason that the task includes the finding of the indicated laws dictated by the structure, the elucidation of the general properties of the objects, the establishment of the relationship between the characteristics, etc. The finiteness of the models used to illustrate the given scheme is brought about by the replacement of the space or the space-time continuum of "real" physics by a finite set.
We extend an empirically grounded theory of the existence of quantum computer. The main question that we are considering is a question about the quantum computer’s possibility of existence and creation. As empirical evidence, we use logic, which we show in cognitive perspective. For a definition of the computer, we use a formal definition of Turing machine. By formulating many definitions abstractly and phenomenologically we go around the areas of quantum physics, quantum computing and other quantum-related fields of science which could give an unambiguous answer to our question about the essence of quantum computer and which is developed so they can’t. In many ways, it makes this theory about the existence of quantum computer universal for these areas, although less applied for them. We consider some corollary of the essences of quantum computer, including the possibility of quantum computer for the human. References to research of cognitive nature of logic suggest empirical basis which we follow in our theory.