Modern Physics Letters A

NON-LINEAR QUANTUM MECHANICS: TWO POSSIBILITIES

Craig D. Roberts

Published Jan 20, 1990• 0 citations

Abstract

A comparative discussion of two possible non-linear extensions of quantum mechanics is presented. It is argued that the two extensions are mutually consistent but applicable to completely different phenomena and that, as a consequence, quantum mechanics will be demonstrated to be truly linear only if both extensions are precluded by experiment.

DOI: 10.1142/s0217732390000111

Related papers

Consistency and Linearity in Quantum Theory

Ariel Caticha

Quantum theory is formulated as the uniquely consistent way to manipulate probability amplitudes. The crucial ingredient is a consistency constraint: if the amplitude of a quantum process can be computed in two different ways, the two answers must agree. The constraint is expressed in the form of functional equations the solution of which leads to the usual sum and product rules for amplitudes. An immediate consequence is that the Schrödinger equation must be linear: non-linear variants of quantum mechanics violate the requirement of consistency. PACS: 03.65.Bz, 03.65.Ca. The formalism of quantum mechanics is very robust; modifications are invariably unsuccessful. A number of non-linear alternative theories have been proposed, [1] experimentally tested, [2] and promptly discarded, but the question of whether new non-linear variants might prove successful is not settled. In fact, interest in the subject remains in spite of, or perhaps, partly because of

Jan 1, 199820 citations

Is quantum mechanics complete?

James T. Cushing

When we are presented with apparently bizarre properties of microsystems governed by quantum mechanics (as in our discussion of the double-slit experiment in the previous chapter), we naturally ask whether it might be possible to find another theory, or at least another story to go with the equations, that would make more sense to us. We might seek a theory and a view of fundamental physical processes that would accord more with our classically based, everyday common sense. This typically takes the form of the question of the possibility of the existence of a more detailed description of atomic processes than that afforded by the wave function (that is, by the Copenhagen interpretation of the previous chapter). In this chapter we discuss some of the central interpretive problems of the Copenhagen version of quantum mechanics. Then, in the next two chapters, we look at the severe, general restrictions that are placed on any such completion of quantum mechanics and at one particular extension of quantum mechanics. First, though, we begin here with the struggle that ensued over the status of causality in quantum theory. THE COMPLETENESS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS Although the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (Section 20.4) and the lack of absolute predictive power are an inherent feature of quantum mechanics, there have been attempts to preserve an in principle completely deterministic structure for physics. Even classically, in a macroscopic sample of gas there are so many molecules that it would be hopeless, as a practical matter, to predict the future locations of all these molecules from Newton's laws of motion.

Cambridge University Press eBooksJan 29, 19980 citations

RELATIVISTIC QUANTUM MECHANICS

Vishnu S. Mathur, Surendra Singh

We have seen in earlier chapters that non-relativistic quantum mechanics does provide a consistent scheme to explain numerous phenomena in atomic, molecular and nuclear physics, but it does not conform to the equivalence of space and time as envisaged in the theory of relativity.

Chapman & Hall/CRC eBooksDec 12, 200833 citations

Entanglement of N distinguishable particles

Tomasz Bigaj

In their 2002 article, Ghirardi, Marinatto and Weber have proposed a formal analysis of the entanglement properties for a system consisting of N distinguishable particles. Their analysis leads to the differentiation of three possible situations that can arise in such systems: complete entanglement, complete non-entanglement, and the remaining cases. I argue that this categorization leaves out one important possibility in which a system is completely entangled, and yet some of its subsystems are mutually non-entangled. As an example I present and discuss a state of a three-particle system which cannot be decomposed into two non-entangled systems, and yet particle number one is not entangled with particle number three. Consequently, I introduce a new notion of utter entanglement, and I argue that some systems may be completely but not utterly entangled.

arXiv:1105.1531May 8, 20111 citation

On (non)linear Quantum Mechanics

P. Nattermann

We review a possible framework for (non)linear quantum theories, into which linear quantum mechanics fits as well, and discuss the notion of ``equivalence'' in this setting. Finally, we draw the attention to persisting severe problems of nonlinear quantum theories.

arXiv:quant-ph/9709044Sep 19, 19974 citations

On the Probabilistic Nature of Observable Phenomena

Muhammad Zahid Ali

This paper proposes a Gadenkan experiment named “Observer’s Dilemma”, to investigate the probabilistic nature of observable phenomena. It has been reasoned that probabilistic nature in, otherwise uniquely deterministic phenomena can be introduced due to lack of information of underlying governing laws. Through theoretical consequences of the experiment, concepts of ‘Absolute Complete’ and ‘Observably Complete” theories have been introduced. Furthermore, nature of reality being ‘absolute’ and ‘observable’ have been discussed along with the possibility of multiple realities being true for observer. In addition, certain aspects of quantum mechanics have been interpreted. It has been argued that quantum mechanics is an ‘observably complete’ theory and its nature is to give probabilistic predictions. Lastly, it has been argued that “Everettian - Many world” interpretation of quantum mechanics is very real and true in the framework of ‘observable nature of reality’, for humans

Jan 1, 20192 citations