Quantum bits can be isolated to perform useful information-theoretic tasks, even though physical systems are fundamentally described by very high-dimensional operator algebras. This is because qubits can be consistently embedded into higher-dimensional Hilbert spaces. A similar embedding of classical probability distributions into quantum theory enables the emergence of classical physics via decoherence. Here, we ask which other probabilistic models can similarly be embedded into finite-dimensional quantum theory. We show that the embeddable models are exactly those that correspond to the Euclidean special Jordan algebras: quantum theory over the reals, the complex numbers, or the quaternions, and "spin factors" (qubits with more than three degrees of freedom), and direct sums thereof. Among those, only classical and standard quantum theory with superselection rules can arise from a physical decoherence map. Our results have significant consequences for some experimental tests of quantum theory, by clarifying how they could (or could not) falsify it. Furthermore, they imply that all unrestricted non-classical models must be contextual.
Quantum bits can be isolated to perform useful information-theoretic tasks, even though physical systems are fundamentally described by very high-dimensional operator algebras. This is because qubits can be consistently embedded into higher-dimensional Hilbert spaces. A similar embedding of classical probability distributions into quantum theory enables the emergence of classical physics via decoherence. Here, we ask which other probabilistic models can similarly be embedded into finite-dimensional quantum theory. We show that the embeddable models are exactly those that correspond to the Euclidean special Jordan algebras: quantum theory over the reals, the complex numbers, or the quaternions, and "spin factors" (qubits with more than three degrees of freedom), and direct sums thereof. Among those, only classical and standard quantum theory with superselection rules can arise from a physical decoherence map. Our results have significant consequences for some experimental tests of quantum theory, by clarifying how they could (or could not) falsify it. Furthermore, they imply that all unrestricted non-classical models must be contextual.
We consider possible non-signaling composites of probabilistic models based on euclidean Jordan algebras. Subject to some reasonable constraints, we show that no such composite exists having the exceptional Jordan algebra as a direct summand. We then construct several dagger compact categories of such Jordan-algebraic models. One of these neatly unifies real, complex and quaternionic mixed-state quantum mechanics, with the exception of the quaternionic "bit". Another is similar, except in that (i) it excludes the quaternionic bit, and (ii) the composite of two complex quantum systems comes with an extra classical bit. In both of these categories, states are morphisms from systems to the tensor unit, which helps give the categorical structure a clear operational interpretation. A no-go result shows that the first of these categories, at least, cannot be extended to include spin factors other than the (real, complex, and quaternionic) quantum bits, while preserving the representation of states as morphisms. The same is true for attempts to extend the second category to even-dimensional spin-factors. Interesting phenomena exhibited by some composites in these categories include failure of local tomography, supermultiplicativity of the maximal number of mutually distinguishable states, and mixed states whose marginals are pure.
The Jordan structure of finite-dimensional quantum theory is derived, in a conspicuously easy way, from a few simple postulates concerning abstract probabilistic models (each defined by a set of basic measurements and a convex set of states). The key assumption is that each system A can be paired with an isomorphic conjugate system, A¯ , by means of a non-signaling bipartite state ηA perfectly and uniformly correlating each basic measurement on A with its counterpart on A¯ . In the case of a quantum-mechanical system associated with a complex Hilbert space H , the conjugate system is that associated with the conjugate Hilbert space H , and ηA corresponds to the standard maximally entangled EPR state on H⊗H¯ . A second ingredient is the notion of a reversible filter , that is, a probabilistically reversible process that independently attenuates the sensitivity of detectors associated with a measurement. In addition to offering more flexibility than most existing reconstructions of finite-dimensional quantum theory, the approach taken here has the advantage of not relying on any form of the ``no restriction" hypothesis. That is, it is not assumed that arbitrary effects are physically measurable, nor that arbitrary families of physically measurable effects summing to the unit effect, represent physically accessible observables. (An appendix shows how a version of Hardy's ``subpace axiom" can replace several assumptions native to this paper, although at the cost of disallowing superselection rules.)
It is a scientific truism nowadays that quantum mechanical predictions are of statistical or rather of probabilistic nature: a quantum theory assigns a probability distribution to each measurable quantity (observable) of a physical system prepared according to a given preparation prescription (state). Such sets of probability distributions represent the most general quantitative predictions of physical theories. The aim of this study is to determine all theoretical frameworks which yield such a kind of output taking the probabilistic nature of quantitative physical predictions as initial hypothesis. Astonishingly, this project succeeds with a minimal number of additional assumptions, which arise quite naturally in the course of the analysis, and which essentially amount to regularity conditions. The result is that there exist only two classes of physical theories providing quantitative probabilistic predictions: classical theories where observables are represented by real functions over a phase space and states are represented by probability measures upon the phase space, and quantum theories where observables are represented by selfadjoint operators acting on a complex Hilbert space and states are represented by state operators. On empirical grounds, classical theories cannot provide the all-encompassing, fundamental frame for the mathematical description of physical systems. Quantum theories remain, and there is no more complete formal frame for quantitative physical theories. As an additional result, it is shown that there exist physical systems which possess a quantum mechanical but no classical description; a prominent example is the spin system of two spin-1/2 particles. The classical hidden variables model, which J. Bell relates to this system in order to prove his theorem, cannot be a true description of it because no such classical model exists, and Bell's theorem loses its foundation.
We investigate the conceptual relationship between decoherence and the origin of probabilistic outcomes in quantum mechanics. While decoherence theory successfully explains the suppression of interference and the emergence of classical behavior through interactions with environmental degrees of freedom, its role in providing a complete account of the probabilistic nature of quantum measurement remains limited. In this work, we argue that the suppression of interference and the origin of probabilistic outcomes constitute distinct problems that should be conceptually distinguished. By “probabilistic outcomes,” we refer to the appearance of statistical distributions in measurement results as described by the Born rule. To clarify this distinction, we analyze limiting scenarios, including isolated quantum systems and the universe treated as a closed system, where the standard decoherence mechanism becomes ineffective or inapplicable, yet probabilistic outcomes persist. These considerations are not intended as a formal proof, but rather as a means to isolate conceptual dependencies. We then revisit the Intrinsic Observability Framework (IOF), in which the Hilbert space is intrinsically decomposed into observable and hidden degrees of freedom. Within this framework, probabilistic descriptions arise from restricted access to the full quantum state, rather than from environmental interactions or dynamical processes. By contrasting decoherence with the IOF perspective, we argue that decoherence provides an account of the emergence of classicality, but does not directly address the origin of quantum probabilities. The IOF, on the other hand, offers a structural perspective at the level of pure states. This suggests that a complete understanding of quantum measurement requires recognizing the distinct roles played by these two elements.
AbstractStandard quantum mechanics is formulated using complex Hilbert spaces, real-valued probabilities, continuous one-parameter dynamics, and—where particles and fields have continuous degrees of freedom —function spaces constructed over continua such as R3 . In that precise mathematical sense, the real and complex continua are deeply embedded in the standard theory. It does not follow, however, that experiments have demonstrated the physical existence of an uncountable set of exact real numbers, still less that individual quantum systems physically “store” infinitely many digits. Every preparation, control operation, and measurement has finite precision, and many quantum predictions can be approximated arbitrarily closely using countable or finite descriptions.This distinction matters because the continuum is sometimes blamed for quantum theory's conceptual strangeness. That diagnosis is mostly unsupported. Superposition, interference, uncertainty, noncommutativity, entanglement, contextuality, Bell-inequality violations, and no-cloning already occur in finite-dimensional quantum systems and do not depend in any straightforward way on continuous position space or arbitrary irrational numbers. Restricting a Hilbert space to rational, algebraic, computable, or finitely specified states therefore does not automatically produce classical physics. Indeed, dense restricted subsets can approximate ordinary quantum predictions to arbitrary finite accuracy, although turning such a subset into a complete physical theory requires much more: closed dynamics, a composition rule, a measurement theory, robustness, and new empirical predictions.A particularly developed contemporary alternative is Tim Palmer's Invariant Set Theory and its recent formulation as Rational Quantum Mechanics (RaQM). RaQM is not accurately described as simply “quantum mechanics with irrational numbers banned.” It restricts the bases in which states are physically defined through number-theoretic rationality conditions, represents admissible states using finite bit strings, invokes a fractal invariant state space equipped with a non-Euclidean, p-adic-like metric, and violates Bell measurement independence at the level of exact counterfactual settings. Palmer's 2026 proposal further predicts a finite qubit-information capacity and an eventual saturation of quantum computational advantage. These are genuine, potentially falsifiable proposals, but they remain speculative and have not displaced standard quantum theory.The strongest conclusion is consequently asymmetric. There is a serious foundational question about whether the continuum is an ontological feature of nature or an extraordinarily efficient mathematical completion. Finite precision prevents existing experiments from proving a literal continuum. But there is presently little evidence that continuum mathematics causes quantum phenomena. Any discrete replacement must still account quantitatively for interference, contextuality, Bell correlations, entanglement, spectroscopy, atomic structure, and quantum computation. Discreteness can change quantum physics only when it is accompanied by additional physical postulates—and those postulates, rather than discreteness alone, must ultimately face experiment.