Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Heidelberg science library

Is Classical Mechanics in Fact Deterministic?

Max Born

Published Jan 1, 1969• 23 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/978-1-4615-7587-0_7

Related papers

Deterministic Quantum Mechanics versus Classical Mechanical Indeterminism

Mohamed Saladin El Naschie

International Journal of Nonlinear Sciences and Numerical Simulation•Jan 1, 2007•42 citations

Is Classical Mechanics Really Time-reversible and Deterministic?

KEITH HUTCHISON

The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science•Jun 1, 1993•50 citations

Do we understand quantum mechanics – finally?

Jürg Martin Fröhlich, Baptiste Schubnel

This paper reviews some of our understanding of general quantum mechanics. It starts with the exposition of an abstract algebraic formalism useful to formulate classical and quantum-mechanical models of physical systems. It then highlights the essential differences between classical models (commutative algebra) and quantum-mechanical models (non-commutative algebra) of physical systems. It is explained in which sense classical models are “realistic” and deterministic, while quantum-mechanical models are intrinsically probabilistic – in spite of the fact that the Heisenberg time-evolution of operators representing physical quantities is “deterministic”. The quantum theory of time-ordered sequences of measurements is developed in some detail, and the crucial role of “decoherence” in the emergence of facts – or “(almost) consistent histories” – is explained. Some technical matters (Bell inequalities, quantum marginal problem) are discussed in appendices.

ESI lectures in mathematics and physics•Apr 11, 2013•9 citations

A mathematical theory for deterministic quantum mechanics

Gerard ’t Hooft

Classical, i.e. deterministic theories underlying quantum mechanics are considered, and it is shown how an apparent quantum mechanical Hamiltonian can be defined in such theories, being the operator that generates evolution in time. It includes various types of interactions. An explanation must be found for the fact that, in the real world, this Hamiltonian is bounded from below. The mechanism that can produce exactly such a constraint is identified in this paper. It is the fact that not all classical data are registered in the quantum description. Large sets of values of these data are assumed to be indistinguishable, forming equivalence classes. It is argued that this should be attributed to information loss, such as what one might suspect to happen during the formation and annihilation of virtual black holes. The nature of the equivalence classes follows from the positivity of the Hamiltonian. Our world is assumed to consist of a very large number of subsystems that may be regarded as approximately independent, or weakly interacting with one another. As long as two (or more) sectors of our world are treated as being independent, they all must be demanded to be restricted to positive energy states only. What follows from these considerations is a unique definition of energy in the quantum system in terms of the periodicity of the limit cycles of the deterministic model.

arXiv:quant-ph/0604008•Journal of Physics Conference Series•May 1, 2007•100 citations

Classical Mechanics Without Determinism

Hrvoje Nikolić

arXiv:quant-ph/0505143•Foundations of Physics Letters•Nov 1, 2006•14 citations

Limitations of Determinism in Classical Mechanics

Michał Tempczyk

Boston studies in the philosophy of science•Jan 1, 1995•0 citations
This paper reviews some of our understanding of general quantum mechanics. It starts with the exposition of an abstract algebraic formalism useful to formulate classical and quantum-mechanical models of physical systems. It then highlights the essential differences between classical models (commutative algebra) and quantum-mechanical models (non-commutative algebra) of physical systems. It is explained in which sense classical models are “realistic” and deterministic, while quantum-mechanical models are intrinsically probabilistic – in spite of the fact that the Heisenberg time-evolution of operators representing physical quantities is “deterministic”. The quantum theory of time-ordered sequences of measurements is developed in some detail, and the crucial role of “decoherence” in the emergence of facts – or “(almost) consistent histories” – is explained. Some technical matters (Bell inequalities, quantum marginal problem) are discussed in appendices.
Classical, i.e. deterministic theories underlying quantum mechanics are considered, and it is shown how an apparent quantum mechanical Hamiltonian can be defined in such theories, being the operator that generates evolution in time. It includes various types of interactions. An explanation must be found for the fact that, in the real world, this Hamiltonian is bounded from below. The mechanism that can produce exactly such a constraint is identified in this paper. It is the fact that not all classical data are registered in the quantum description. Large sets of values of these data are assumed to be indistinguishable, forming equivalence classes. It is argued that this should be attributed to information loss, such as what one might suspect to happen during the formation and annihilation of virtual black holes. The nature of the equivalence classes follows from the positivity of the Hamiltonian. Our world is assumed to consist of a very large number of subsystems that may be regarded as approximately independent, or weakly interacting with one another. As long as two (or more) sectors of our world are treated as being independent, they all must be demanded to be restricted to positive energy states only. What follows from these considerations is a unique definition of energy in the quantum system in terms of the periodicity of the limit cycles of the deterministic model.