The source of inspiration for doing quantum probability lies in the ingenious methods adopted by physicists to compute probabilities of events concerning the subatomic world of elementary particles where the laws of classical mechanics break down and the distinction between a particle and a wave becomes vague. These methods lead to a generalisation of classical probability which may be described as a study of observable quantities concerning any system subject to chance and exhibiting the following basic features: (i) each observable quantity behaves like a classical real valued random variable on a probability space and hence has a probability distribution on the real line; (ii) it may be impossible to measure simultaneously two individually observable quantities in the sense that measurement of one may interfere with and destroy already existing information about the value of the other; (iii) bounded observable quantities constitute a real linear space in which the vectorial sum of two individually observable quantities interfering with each other is different from the arithmetic sum of their actual values. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
The source of inspiration for doing quantum probability lies in the ingenious methods adopted by physicists to compute probabilities of events concerning the subatomic world of elementary particles where the laws of classical mechanics break down and the distinction between a particle and a wave becomes vague. These methods lead to a generalisation of classical probability which may be described as a study of observable quantities concerning any system subject to chance and exhibiting the following basic features: (i) each observable quantity behaves like a classical real valued random variable on a probability space and hence has a probability distribution on the real line; (ii) it may be impossible to measure simultaneously two individually observable quantities in the sense that measurement of one may interfere with and destroy already existing information about the value of the other; (iii) bounded observable quantities constitute a real linear space in which the vectorial sum of two individually observable quantities interfering with each other is different from the arithmetic sum of their actual values. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
An outline is given of the interpretation of quantum mechanical expressions if one assumes that what is called Quantum Mechanics today, refers to an underlying reality as in Chap. 2 , even if many authors claim to have evidence to the contrary, as is usually brought forward. If there exists a sub-microscopic classical world of real things, is that the same classical world as the world of large things such as planets, rocks and people? How does the notion of probability enter into quantum mechanics? These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
We restrict ourselves to finite level systems. Elementary classical probability theory is woven around the notions of a finite sample space or an alphabet A, events which are subsets of A, random variables which are real or complex-valued functions on A and probability distributions which are, once again, functions on A with values in the unit interval adding to unity. An event E ⊂ A can be equivalently replaced by the two-valued indicator function 1 E which is one on the set E and zero on the complement E′ of E in A. Thus all the basic objects, namely, events, random variables and distributions are functions on A. Complex-valued functions on A constitute a commutative algebra A A with complex conjugation as an involution. Thus an event can be identified as an element f ∈ A A satisfying f = f2 = f̄ where the bar indicates complex conjugation. A real-valued random variable is an element f ∈ A A satisfying f = f̄ whereas a probability distribution is an element p ∈ A A satisfying p(x) ≥ 0 ∀ x ∈ A and ∑ x∈A p( x )=1 . x∈A∑p(x)=1. . Note that every nonnegative function on A has the form f f̄ for some f ∈ A A .
Introduction Quantum probability is a generalization of both classical probability theory and quantum mechanics that allows to describe the probabilistic aspects of quantum mechanics. This generalization is formulated in two steps. First, the theory is reformulated in terms of algebras of functions on probability spaces. Therefore, the notion of a probability space (Ω, ℱ , P ) is replaced by the pair ( L ∞ (Ω), E (.) = ∫ Ω . d P ) consisting of the commutative von Neumann algebra of bounded random variables and the expectation functional. Then, the commutativity condition is dropped. In this way we arrive at the notion of a (von Neumann) algebraic probability space ( N ,Φ) consisting of a von Neumann algebra N and a normal (faithful tracial) state Φ. As we have seen this includes classical probability spaces in the form ( L ∞ (Ω), E ), it also includes quantum mechanical systems modeled by a Hilbert space H and a pure state ψ ∊ H (or a mixed state ρ ∊ S ( H )), if we take N = B ( H ) and Ф the state defined by Ф( X ) = 〈 ψ, X ψ 〉 (or Ф ( X ) = tr(ρ X )) for X ∊ B ( H ). Note that in this course we shall relax the conditions on N and Φ and work with involutive algebras and positive normalized functionals, that is, *-algebraic probability spaces. A striking feature of quantum probability (also called noncommutative probability) is the existence of several notions of independence. This is the starting point of this course, which intends to give an introduction to the theory of quantum stochastic processes with independent increments. However, before we come to these processes, we will give a general introduction to quantum probability. In Section 1.2, we recall the basic definitions of quantum probability and discuss some fundamental differences between classical probability and quantum probability. In Section 1.3 we address the question ‘Why do we need Quantum Probability?’ We discuss the EPR experiment and the Kochen–Specker Theorem, which show that we cannot model quantum physics with classical probability spaces because the values of observable quantities do not exist unless we specify which measurement we will carry out and which quantities we will determine. In this sense quantum physics requires a more radical description of chance.
The measurement problem of quantum mechanics was probably born in 1926: ‘Thus Schrödinger’s quantum mechanics gives a very definite answer to the question of the outcome of a collision; however, this does not involve any causal relationship. One obtains no answer to the question “what is the state after the collision,” but only to the question “how probable is a specific outcome of the collision” (in which the quantum-mechanical law of [conservation of] energy must of course be satisfied). This raises the entire problem of determinism. From the standpoint of our quantum mechanics, there is no quantity that could causally establish the outcome of a collision in each individual case; however, so far we are not aware of any experimental clue to the effect that there are internal properties of atoms that enforce some particular outcome. Should we hope to discover such properties that determine individual outcomes later (perhaps phases of the internal atomic motions)? Or should we believe that the agreement between theory and experiment concerning our inability to give conditions for a causal course of events is some pre-established harmony that is based on the non-existence of such conditions? I myself tend to relinquish determinism in the atomic world. But this is [also] a philosophical question, for which physical arguments alone are not decisive.’ (Born, 1926a, p. 866; translation by the author) These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
The quantities in physics that can be measured are conventionally denoted observables : entities that can be observed (directly or indirectly) and to which a value in appropriate units can be assigned. Examples include position, momentum, and energy. Unlike in classical physics, the concept of an observable in quantum theory possesses a significance beyond that of the measurable: to each observable there corresponds a unique operator in an abstract, linear vector space. These operators (and others) govern all aspects of quantum systems. Quantum operators act on abstract vectors in the linear space. Especially important are the eigenvectors and eigenvalues of these operators, in particular because some of the eigenvectors are the quantum states mentioned in the preceding chapters. Furthermore, for any operator that is the mathematical image of an observable, its eigenvalues constitute the entire set of values that measurement of the observable can yield . Finally, from the quantum states one can obtain the probabilities for the occurrence of events in the microscopic world, for example, the most likely value that measurement of an observable will yield. The concepts of operators and eigenvalue problems, as well as those of quantal probabilities, of Hermiticity, and of complete sets, were encountered and exemplified in the preceding chapter using the language of differential equations. While much of quantum mechanics could be presented in terms of this language alone, certain fundamental concepts (spin, for instance) cannot be, and it eventually becomes necessary to consider quantum mechanics as a theoretical framework embedded in that abstract linear vector space known as a Hilbert space.
In quantum theory, vortex lines arise in the hydrodynamic interpretation of the wave equation. In this interpretation, which is originally due to Madelung, the flow of the probability density for a single particle is described in terms of the hydrodynamic variables. For the sake of simplicity, the standard time-dependent Schrödinger equation, and the related vortex lines embedded in the probability fluid of the quantum particle, are considered here. A vortex line in this case is simply the curve defined by equating the wave function to zero. The linearity of the Schrödinger equation enables us to obtain a large family of exact time-dependent analytic solutions for the wave functions with vortex lines. Moreover, the method is general enough to allow for various initial configurations of the vortex lines. Although the equation of motion of the quantum mechanical probability fluid is different in its literal form from the equations describing the real physical fluid, we believe that the evolution of the vorticity in the quantum and in the real fluid share the same qualitative features that can be described in terms of the topology of the vortex lines configurations. The general phenomena such as the switch-over, creation and annihilation of vortices can be observed in the quantum mechanical fluid. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.