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

Reports on Mathematical Physics

On the role of projection postulate in quantum theory

PEKKA J. LAHTI

Published Apr 1, 1985• 4 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1016/0034-4877(85)90064-3

Related papers

Property attribution and the projection postulate in relativistic quantum theory

J. Finkelstein

arXiv:quant-ph/0007105•Physics Letters A•Dec 1, 2000•3 citations

Quantum mechanics without the projection postulate

Jeffrey Bub

Foundations of Physics•May 1, 1992•88 citations

Bell’s inequality, Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen arguments and von Neumann’s projection postulate

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

This paper is devoted to analysis of the role of projection postulate in Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen-EPR [1] argument against completeness of QM. It will be shown that the EPR considerations do not match with von Neumann’s quantum measurement theory (QMT). The root of EPR’s conclusion on incompleteness of QM is the misuse of von Neumann’s projection postulate. EPR applied this postulate to observables with degenerate spectra (which is totally forbidden by von Neumann’s axiomatics of QM). Consequences for Bell’s inequality and quantum information theory are analyzed. This paper might stimulate discussion on the role of projection postulate in quantum information theory, especially quantum cryptography and teleportation.

Laser Physics•Feb 1, 2009•8 citations

Quantum mechanics without the projection postulate and its realistic interpretation

Dennis Dieks

Foundations of Physics•Nov 1, 1989•80 citations

Two Versions of the Projection Postulate: From EPR Argument to One‐Way Quantum Computing and Teleportation

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

Nowadays it is practically forgotten that for observables with degenerate spectra the original von Neumann projection postulate differs crucially from the version of the projection postulate which was later formalized by Lüders. The latter (and not that due to von Neumann) plays the crucial role in the basic constructions of quantum information theory. We start this paper with the presentation of the notions related to the projection postulate. Then we remind that the argument of Einstein‐Podolsky‐Rosen against completeness of QM was based on the version of the projection postulate which is nowadays called Lüders postulate. Then we recall that all basic measurements on composite systems are represented by observables with degenerate spectra. This implies that the difference in the formulation of the projection postulate (due to von Neumann and Lüders) should be taken into account seriously in the analysis of the basic constructions of quantum information theory. This paper is a review devoted to such an analysis.

Advances in Mathematical Physics•Jan 1, 2010•4 citations

The role of von Neumann and Lüders postulates in the EPR-Bohm-Bell considerations: Did EPR make a mistake?

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

We show that the projection postulate plays a crucial role in the discussion on the so called "quantum nonlocality", in particular in the EPR-argument. We stress that the original von Neumann projection postulate was crucially modified by extending it to observables with degenerate spectra (the Lüders postulate) and we show that this modification is highly questionable from a physical point of view, and it is the real source of "quantum nonlocality". The use of the original von Neumann postulate eliminates this problem: instead of "action at the distance"-nonlocality, we obtain a classical measurement nonlocality. It seems that EPR did mistake in their 1935-paper: if one uses correctly von Neumann projection postulate, no ``elements of reality'' can be assigned to entangled systems. Our analysis of the EPR and projection postulate makes clearer Bohr's considerations in his reply to Einstein.

arXiv:0801.0419•Jan 2, 2008•4 citations
This paper is devoted to analysis of the role of projection postulate in Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen-EPR [1] argument against completeness of QM. It will be shown that the EPR considerations do not match with von Neumann’s quantum measurement theory (QMT). The root of EPR’s conclusion on incompleteness of QM is the misuse of von Neumann’s projection postulate. EPR applied this postulate to observables with degenerate spectra (which is totally forbidden by von Neumann’s axiomatics of QM). Consequences for Bell’s inequality and quantum information theory are analyzed. This paper might stimulate discussion on the role of projection postulate in quantum information theory, especially quantum cryptography and teleportation.
Nowadays it is practically forgotten that for observables with degenerate spectra the original von Neumann projection postulate differs crucially from the version of the projection postulate which was later formalized by Lüders. The latter (and not that due to von Neumann) plays the crucial role in the basic constructions of quantum information theory. We start this paper with the presentation of the notions related to the projection postulate. Then we remind that the argument of Einstein‐Podolsky‐Rosen against completeness of QM was based on the version of the projection postulate which is nowadays called Lüders postulate. Then we recall that all basic measurements on composite systems are represented by observables with degenerate spectra. This implies that the difference in the formulation of the projection postulate (due to von Neumann and Lüders) should be taken into account seriously in the analysis of the basic constructions of quantum information theory. This paper is a review devoted to such an analysis.
We show that the projection postulate plays a crucial role in the discussion on the so called "quantum nonlocality", in particular in the EPR-argument. We stress that the original von Neumann projection postulate was crucially modified by extending it to observables with degenerate spectra (the Lüders postulate) and we show that this modification is highly questionable from a physical point of view, and it is the real source of "quantum nonlocality". The use of the original von Neumann postulate eliminates this problem: instead of "action at the distance"-nonlocality, we obtain a classical measurement nonlocality. It seems that EPR did mistake in their 1935-paper: if one uses correctly von Neumann projection postulate, no ``elements of reality'' can be assigned to entangled systems. Our analysis of the EPR and projection postulate makes clearer Bohr's considerations in his reply to Einstein.