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

The frontiers collection

Classical Limit of Quantum Physics

A. O. Bolivar

Published Jan 1, 2004• 1 citation
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/978-3-662-09649-9_5

Related papers

Projection postulates

Peter Gibbins

The concept of measurement plays both a central and a problematic role in quantum mechanics. First of all, and unusually, the word ‘measurement’ figures in the fundamental axioms of quantum mechanics - in principle (3) of Chapter 2 for example - and in this quantum physics is quite unlike classical physics as a whole. For though a measurement made on a classical system naturally involves an interaction between the system and a measuring apparatus, there is nothing special according to classical physics about measurement interactions. Describing the measuring process is a straightforward problem of applied classical physics. The classical laws of motion do not break down during the measuring process. For example, suppose you observe a classical particle using light bounced off it. In the classical account you can make the disturbance on the observed system as small as you like and, ‘in principle', you can observe the system with arbitrary accuracy. ‘In principle’ - a favorite expression of the philosopher of physics - means what it always means in physics. The contrast is with ‘in practice'. Of course, in practice there are all sorts of limitations on measurement. There are also some theoretical limitations, like those due to thermodynamics. But these are not the limitations imposed by the theory we are considering, namely classical mechanics. Such limitations as there are are imposed by some other theory. (The expression ‘in principle’ tends to be used when we are discussing the principles of a particular theory and, theoretically but not in practice, physics is a collection of disjoint theories.)

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Sep 25, 1987•0 citations

Classical Limit of Quantum Mechanics

Dipankar Home

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 1997•0 citations

Differences Between Quantum Mechanics and Classical Physics Based on Schordinger's Equation

Hui Liang

Schordinger's equation is the basical equation of quantum mechanics,which is equivalent to Newton's motion equation in classical physics. This paper compares the differences between quantum mechanics and classical physics by means of discussing the description of motion state and the expression of mechanic quantity of microcosmic particles in Schordinger's equation. It can be seen in this paper that the basical principle of quantum mechanics is the statistical one, while the basical principle of classical physics is the determinism and the strict causality. But under the h→0 limit in Planck constant, quantum mechanics will go beyond normal limit to classical physics.

Journal of Anhui Science and Technology University•Jan 1, 2003•0 citations

Classical limit of quantum mechanics

Wagel Siegel

•Jan 1, 1976•0 citations

What is Physics For? Why Classical Physics is not the Limit of Quantum Mechanics

Adam Frank, Jacques L. Pienaar, Michel Bitbol +4 more

Quantum mechanics is justifiably held to be the most successful physical theory ever created; yet no universally accepted interpretation of its mathematical formalism exists after a century of debate. We examine the specific claim that classical physics stands as the low-action limit of quantum mechanics, arguing that the deep interpretive difficulties exposed by the quantum formalism, the measurement problem, the subject-object divide, and the nature of scientific representation, were already latent in classical physics, constituting what we call a blind spot of objectivity. Taking quantum theory as an invitation to re-examine the implicit metaphysical commitments bundled with 'classical physics', we explore two key issues-the objective/subjective split and the nature of theoretical representation-and argue that quantum mechanics does not represent a break with classical physics per se but rather brings previously unacknowledged philosophical assumptions into the limelight. We discuss the London-Bauer interpretation and QBism as exemplars of interpretations that embrace this broader reconceptualisation.

physics.hist-phCross-listedarXiv:2609.36207•Sep 30, 2026•0 citations

Classical limit of quantum mechanics

Dipankar Home, S. Sengupta

American Journal of Physics•Mar 1, 1983•13 citations
The concept of measurement plays both a central and a problematic role in quantum mechanics. First of all, and unusually, the word ‘measurement’ figures in the fundamental axioms of quantum mechanics - in principle (3) of Chapter 2 for example - and in this quantum physics is quite unlike classical physics as a whole. For though a measurement made on a classical system naturally involves an interaction between the system and a measuring apparatus, there is nothing special according to classical physics about measurement interactions. Describing the measuring process is a straightforward problem of applied classical physics. The classical laws of motion do not break down during the measuring process. For example, suppose you observe a classical particle using light bounced off it. In the classical account you can make the disturbance on the observed system as small as you like and, ‘in principle', you can observe the system with arbitrary accuracy. ‘In principle’ - a favorite expression of the philosopher of physics - means what it always means in physics. The contrast is with ‘in practice'. Of course, in practice there are all sorts of limitations on measurement. There are also some theoretical limitations, like those due to thermodynamics. But these are not the limitations imposed by the theory we are considering, namely classical mechanics. Such limitations as there are are imposed by some other theory. (The expression ‘in principle’ tends to be used when we are discussing the principles of a particular theory and, theoretically but not in practice, physics is a collection of disjoint theories.)
Schordinger's equation is the basical equation of quantum mechanics,which is equivalent to Newton's motion equation in classical physics. This paper compares the differences between quantum mechanics and classical physics by means of discussing the description of motion state and the expression of mechanic quantity of microcosmic particles in Schordinger's equation. It can be seen in this paper that the basical principle of quantum mechanics is the statistical one, while the basical principle of classical physics is the determinism and the strict causality. But under the h→0 limit in Planck constant, quantum mechanics will go beyond normal limit to classical physics.
Quantum mechanics is justifiably held to be the most successful physical theory ever created; yet no universally accepted interpretation of its mathematical formalism exists after a century of debate. We examine the specific claim that classical physics stands as the low-action limit of quantum mechanics, arguing that the deep interpretive difficulties exposed by the quantum formalism, the measurement problem, the subject-object divide, and the nature of scientific representation, were already latent in classical physics, constituting what we call a blind spot of objectivity. Taking quantum theory as an invitation to re-examine the implicit metaphysical commitments bundled with 'classical physics', we explore two key issues-the objective/subjective split and the nature of theoretical representation-and argue that quantum mechanics does not represent a break with classical physics per se but rather brings previously unacknowledged philosophical assumptions into the limelight. We discuss the London-Bauer interpretation and QBism as exemplars of interpretations that embrace this broader reconceptualisation.