Quantum theory was radically different from the theories of nature which came before it. One key difference was its use of complex numbers. This opened a longstanding debate over whether quantum theory fundamentally requires complex numbers -- or if their use is merely a convenient choice. Until recently, this question was considered open. However, in a 2021 Nature article, a decisive argument was presented asserting that quantum theory needs complex numbers since real-number quantum theory is inconsistent with the postulates of quantum theory. In this work, we show that this conclusion was premature, and in actual fact, a real-number quantum theory is consistent with the postulates of quantum theory. Our theory retains key features such as representation locality (i.e. local physical operations are represented by local changes to the states). A direct consequence of our results is that quantum theory based on real or complex numbers are experimentally indistinguishable.
Quantum theory was radically different from the theories of nature which came before it. One key difference was its use of complex numbers. This opened a longstanding debate over whether quantum theory fundamentally requires complex numbers -- or if their use is merely a convenient choice. Until recently, this question was considered open. However, in a 2021 Nature article, a decisive argument was presented asserting that quantum theory needs complex numbers since real-number quantum theory is inconsistent with the postulates of quantum theory. In this work, we show that this conclusion was premature, and in actual fact, a real-number quantum theory is consistent with the postulates of quantum theory. Our theory retains key features such as representation locality (i.e. local physical operations are represented by local changes to the states). A direct consequence of our results is that quantum theory based on real or complex numbers are experimentally indistinguishable.
Complex numbers play a crucial role in quantum mechanics. However, their necessity remains debated: whether they are fundamental or merely convenient. Recently, it was shown that any real-number quantum theory satisfying certain postulates can be falsified with multipartite experiments. In this Letter we show that a physically motivated postulate about composite quantum systems allows us to construct quantum mechanics based on real numbers that reproduces predictions for all multipartite quantum experiments. Thus, we argue that real-valued quantum mechanics cannot be falsified, and therefore the use of complex numbers is a matter of convenience.
Abstract Although complex numbers are essential in mathematics, they are not needed to describe physical experiments, as those are expressed in terms of probabilities, hence real numbers. Physics, however, aims to explain, rather than describe, experiments through theories. Although most theories of physics are based on real numbers, quantum theory was the first to be formulated in terms of operators acting on complex Hilbert spaces 1,2 . This has puzzled countless physicists, including the fathers of the theory, for whom a real version of quantum theory, in terms of real operators, seemed much more natural 3 . In fact, previous studies have shown that such a ‘real quantum theory’ can reproduce the outcomes of any multipartite experiment, as long as the parts share arbitrary real quantum states 4 . Here we investigate whether complex numbers are actually needed in the quantum formalism. We show this to be case by proving that real and complex Hilbert-space formulations of quantum theory make different predictions in network scenarios comprising independent states and measurements. This allows us to devise a Bell-like experiment, the successful realization of which would disprove real quantum theory, in the same way as standard Bell experiments disproved local physics.
Standard quantum mechanics employs complex Hilbert spaces, but whether complex numbers are fundamental or merely convenient has long been debated. For decades, real-valued equivalents were considered mathematically possible but cumbersome. However, a highly cited 2021 result claimed that any quantum theory based on real numbers is experimentally falsifiable via network Bell experiments. Yet, it remains an open question whether this falsification applies to all real-valued theories. Here we show that this conclusion rests on an incomplete real formulation, and we present a rigorous real-valued framework that perfectly reproduces all predictions of standard quantum mechanics. We demonstrate that the standard real tensor product (⊗R) used in previous no-go theorems is algebraically incompatible with the rich structure of conventional quantum mechanics. We present a real framework based on Kähler space and prove that it is exactly isomorphic to established quantum mechanics via an explicit bijection γ. The isomorphism extends to composite systems through a symplectic composition rule $\otimes^{\ks}$ that replaces the Kronecker product. Consequently, our formulation achieves the maximal CHSH3 violation of 62 using purely real variables, demonstrating that the no-go theorem is specific to a particular real representation of states and operators and to the composition rule ⊗R built upon it, neither of which extends to the present Kähler framework. These results demonstrate that complex numbers are not fundamentally required by nature; rather, they encode a deeper real geometric structure that governs quantum interference and entanglement, settling this long debate.
Complex numbers, i.e., numbers with a and an imaginary part, are essential for mathematical analysis, while their role in other subjects, such as electromagnetism or special relativity, is far less fundamental. Quantum is the only physical theory where these numbers seem to play an indispensible role, as the theory is explicitly formulated in terms of operators acting on complex Hilbert spaces. The occurrence of complex numbers within the quantum formalism has nonetheless puzzled countless physicists, including the fathers of the theory, for whom a version of quantum physics, where states and observables are represented by operators, seemed much more natural. In fact, previous works showed that such real quantum physics can reproduce the outcomes of any multipartite experiment, as long as the parts share arbitrary quantum states. Thus, are complex numbers really needed for a quantum description of nature? Here, we show this to be case by proving that and complex quantum make different predictions in network scenarios comprising independent quantum state sources. This allows us to devise a Bell-type quantum experiment whose input-output correlations cannot be approximated by any quantum model. The successful realization of such an experiment would disprove quantum physics, in the same way as standard Bell experiments disproved local physics.
Barrios Hita et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 240202 (2026)] argued that quantum mechanics can be formulated over the real numbers by replacing the tensor-product postulate with a quotient-space construction, and concluded that complex numbers are therefore a matter of convenience. We show that the operational content of this construction is not that of a generic real Hilbert-space theory. Empirical equivalence requires a distinguished real linear operator J with J2=−1, and all physical effects, instruments, and dynamics must preserve the corresponding SO(2) gauge. Moreover, the composite-system rule is a balanced tensor product over this hidden complex structure, not the ordinary tensor product over R. In multipartite network scenarios, this changes the meaning of source independence: canonical real representatives are not source-factorizable in the usual tensor-product sense. Thus, the construction is best understood as standard complex quantum mechanics written in real notation, not as an independent real-amplitude theory. This clarifies what is, and is not, excluded by experiments testing the necessity of complex numbers.
The manuscript [arXiv:2603.19208] proposes a physically motivated postulate to select the appropriate formulation of quantum theory over real Hilbert spaces, ruling out the theory considered in [Nature 600, 625-629 (2021)] in favour of an alternative theory which reproduces the predictions of standard complex quantum information theory. Here, we argue that, to qualify as a general physical principle, this postulate should also hold in fermionic quantum information theory, the standard framework describing information encoded in the presence or absence of identical fermions. We show, however, that it fails in this framework. More broadly, our result highlights the importance of confronting proposed foundational principles with fermionic quantum information theory, a point that also deserves further examination in recent related works such as [arXiv:2503.17307] and [arXiv:2504.02808].