Abstract Sums play a prominent role in the formalisms of quantum mechanics, whether for mixing and superposing states, or for composing state spaces. Surprisingly, a conceptual analysis of quantum measurement seems to suggest that quantum mechanics can be done without direct sums, expressed entirely in terms of the tensor product. The corresponding axioms define classical spaces as objects that allow copying and deleting data. Indeed, the information exchange between the quantum and the classical worlds is essentially determined by their distinct capabilities to copy and delete data. The sums turn out to be an implicit implementation of this capability. Realizing it through explicit axioms not only dispenses with the unnecessary structural baggage, but also allows a simple and intuitive graphical calculus. In category-theoretic terms, classical data types are †-compact Frobenius algebras, and quantum spectra underlying quantum measurements are Eilenberg-Moore coalgebras induced by these Frobenius algebras.
Abstract Sums play a prominent role in the formalisms of quantum mechanics, whether for mixing and superposing states, or for composing state spaces. Surprisingly, a conceptual analysis of quantum measurement seems to suggest that quantum mechanics can be done without direct sums, expressed entirely in terms of the tensor product. The corresponding axioms define classical spaces as objects that allow copying and deleting data. Indeed, the information exchange between the quantum and the classical worlds is essentially determined by their distinct capabilities to copy and delete data. The sums turn out to be an implicit implementation of this capability. Realizing it through explicit axioms not only dispenses with the unnecessary structural baggage, but also allows a simple and intuitive graphical calculus. In category-theoretic terms, classical data types are †-compact Frobenius algebras, and quantum spectra underlying quantum measurements are Eilenberg-Moore coalgebras induced by these Frobenius algebras.
Sums play a prominent role in the formalisms of quantum mechanics, be it for mixing and superposing states, or for composing state spaces. Surprisingly, a conceptual analysis of quantum measurement seems to suggest that quantum mechanics can be done without direct sums, expressed entirely in terms of the tensor product. The corresponding axioms define classical spaces as objects that allow copying and deleting data. Indeed, the information exchange between the quantum and the classical worlds is essentially determined by their distinct capabilities to copy and delete data. The sums turn out to be an implicit implementation of this capabilities. Realizing it through explicit axioms not only dispenses with the unnecessary structural baggage, but also allows a simple and intuitive graphical calculus. In category-theoretic terms, classical data types are dagger-compact Frobenius algebras, and quantum spectra underlying quantum measurements are Eilenberg-Moore coalgebras induced by these Frobenius algebras.
Sums play a prominent role in the formalisms of quantum mechanics, be it for mixing and superposing states, or for composing state spaces.Surprisingly, a conceptual analysis of quantum measurement seems to suggest that quantum mechanics can be done without direct sums, expressed entirely in terms of the tensor product.The corresponding axioms define classical spaces as objects that allow copying and deleting data.Indeed, the information exchange between the quantum and the classical worlds is essentially determined by their distinct capabilities to copy and delete data.The sums turn out to be an implicit implementation of this capability.Realizing it through explicit axioms not only dispenses with the unnecessary structural baggage, but also allows a simple and intuitive graphical calculus.In category-theoretic terms, classical data types are †-compact Frobenius algebras, and quantum spectra underlying quantum measurements are Eilenberg-Moore coalgebras induced by these Frobenius algebras. QUANTUM MEASUREMENTS WITHOUT SUMS1 But while computing devices do manipulate strings of 0s and 1s, and high-level modern programming is a matter of providing a convenient interface with that process, the language for quantum information and computation we seek is not a convenient superstructure, but the meaningful infrastructure. 2A closely related knot-theoretical scheme has been put forward by Kauffman in [23].7 See [17] for a discussion why we call this 'formal decohering'.
In recent work, several researchers including the authors have developed a categorical formalization of quantum mechanics in terms of symmetric monoidal dagger categories. In this framework, classical data turned out to be represented by an algebraic structure, that of special commutative dagger Frobenius algebras. This structure captures the distinct capabilities that apply to classical data – that they can be copied and deleted. In the present paper, we provide categorical semantics and diagrammatic representations of deterministic, nondeterministic, and probabilistic operations over classical data represented in this way. Moreover, a combination of some fundamental categorical constructions (the Kleisli construction of the category of free algebras and the Grothendieck construction of the total category of an indexed category) with the specific categorical presentations of pure and mixed quantum states provides a resource-sensitive categorical account of classical control of quantum data and of classical data resulting from quantum measurements, as well as of the classical data processing that may happen in between measurements and controls. Along the way we also discover some apparently novel quantum typing structures. One of the salient features of categorical quantum mechanics is still its graphic calculus, which allows succinct presentations of diverse quantum protocols. The elements of an abstract stochastic calculus are beginning to emerge from it, pointing toward convenient refinements of resource-sensitive logics that are hoped to capture the probabilistic content and limited observability of quantum data.
``Quantum'' stands for for the concepts (both operational and formal) which had to be added to classical physics in order to understand otherwise unexplainable observed phenomena such as the structure of the spectral lines in atomic spectra. While the basic part of classical mechanics deals with the (essentially) reversible dynamics, quantum required adding the notions of ``measurement'' and (possibly non-local) ``correlations'' to the discussion. Crucially, all this comes with a ``probabilistic calculus''. The corresponding mathematical formalism was considered to have reached maturity in [von Neumann 1932], but there are some manifest problems with that formalism: (i) While measurements are applied to physical systems, application of their formal counterpart (i.e. a self-adjoint linear operator) to the vector representing that state of the system in no way reflects how the state changes during the act of measurement. Analogously, the composite of two self-adjoint operators has no physical significance while in practice measurements can be effectuated sequentially. More generally, the formal types in von Neumann's formalism do not reflect the nature of the corresponding underlying concept at all! (ii) Part of the problem regarding the measurements discussed above is that in the von Neumann formalism there is no place for storage, manipulation and exchange of the classical data obtained from measurements. Protocols such as quantum teleportation involving these cannot be given a full formal description. (iii) The behavioral properties of quantum entanglement which for example enable continuous data exchange using only finitary communication are hidden in the formalism. In [Abramsky and Coecke 2004] we addressed all these problems, and in addition provided a purely categorical axiomatization of quantum mechanics. The concepts of the abstract quantum mechanics are formulated relative to a strongly compact closed category with biproducts (of which the category FdHilb of finite dimensional Hilbert spaces and linear maps is an example). Preparations, measurements, either destructive or not, classical data exchange are all morphisms in that category, and their types fully reflect their kinds. Correctness properties of standard quantum protocols can be abstractly proven. Surprisingly, in this seemingly purely qualitative setting even the quantitative Born rule arises, that is the rule which tells you how to calculate the probabilities. Indeed, each such category has as endomorphism Hom of the tensor unit an abelian semiring of `scalars', and a special subset of these scalars will play the role of weights: each scalar induces a natural transformation which propagates through physical processes, and when a `state' undergoes a `measurement', the composition of the corresponding morphisms gives rise to the weight. Hence the probabilistic weights live within the category of processes. J. von Neumann. Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik. Springer-Verlag (1932). English translation in Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Princeton University Press (1955). S. Abramsky and B. Coecke. A categorical semantics of quantum protocols. In the proceedings of LiCS'04 (2004). An extended version is available at arXiv:quant-ph/0402130 A more reader friendly version entitled `Quantum information flow, concretely, abstractly' is at http://www.vub.ac.be/CLEA/Bob/Papers/QPL.pdf
Abstract Measurement lies at the core of the quantum formalism. This may seem a statement of the intuitively obvious for any theoretical structure with a pretension to predict the outcomes of observations made or experiments performed on objects in the real world. But classical mechanics is a theorys of the physical properties of objects and their behaviour when exposed to different kinds of forces, and there is no particularly significant role for measurement other than a passive role involving the recording of those properties or behaviour. In contrast, measurement in quantum theory takes on a far deeper, almost ominous, significance
We provide a definition of POVM in terms of abstract tensor structure only. It is justified in two distinct manners. i. At this abstract level we are still able to prove Naimark's theorem, hence establishing a bijective correspondence between abstract POVMs and abstract projective measurements (cf. [B. Coecke and D. Pavlovic (2007) Quantum measurements without sums. In: Mathematics of Quantum Computing and Technology. Chapman & Hall, pp. 559–596. E-print available from arXiv:quant-ph/0608035]) on an extended system, and this proof is moreover purely graphical. ii. Our definition coincides with the usual one for the particular case of the Hilbert space tensor product. We also provide a very useful normal form result for the classical object structure introduced in [B. Coecke and D. Pavlovic (2007) Quantum measurements without sums. In: Mathematics of Quantum Computing and Technology. Chapman & Hall, pp. 559–596. E-print available from arXiv:quant-ph/0608035].