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

Journal of Physics Conference Series

Chaos and the quantum: how nonlinear effects can explain certain quantum paradoxes

Wm. C. McHarris

Published Jul 8, 2011• 7 citations
Publisher

Abstract

In recent years we have suggested that many of the so-called paradoxes resulting from the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics could well have more logical parallels based in nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory. Perhaps quantum mechanics might not be strictly linear as has been commonly postulated, and indeed, during the past year experimentalists have discovered signatures of chaos in a definitely quantum system. As an illustration of what can go wrong when quantum effects are forced into a linear interpretation, I examine Bell-type inequalities. In conventional derivations of such inequalities, classical systems are found to impose upper limits on the statistical correlations between, say, the properties of a pair of separated but entangled particles, whereas quantum systems allow greater correlations. Numerous experiments have upheld the quantum predictions (greater statistical correlations than allowed classically), which has led to inferences such as the instantaneous transmission of information between effectively infinitely separated particles — Einstein's "spooky action-at-a-distance," incompatible with relativity. I argue that there is nothing wrong with the quantum mechanical side of such derivations (the usual point of attack by those attempting to debunk Bell-type arguments), but implicit in the derivations on the classical side is the assumption of independent, uncorrelated particles. As a result, one is comparing uncorrelated probabilities versus conditional probabilities rather than comparing classical versus quantum mechanics, making moot the experimental inferences. Further, nonlinear classical systems are known to exhibit correlations that can easily be as great as and overlap with quantum correlations — so-called nonextensive thermodynamics with its nonadditive entropy has verified this with numerous examples. Perhaps quantum mechanics does contain fundamental nonlinear elements. Nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory could well provide a bridge between the determinism so dear to Einstein and the statisical interpretation of the Copenhagen school. Einstein and Bohr both could have been right in their debates.

DOI
10.1088/1742-6596/306/1/012050

Related papers

Quantum Mechanics, Nonlinear Dynamics, and Correlated Statistical Mechanics

Wm. C. McHarris

Many of the so‐called paradoxes of orthodox quantum mechanics can be shown to have parallel, more logical interpretations in the realm of nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory. Among these are violations of Bell‐type inequalities, which in comparing “classical” mechanics with quantum mechanics implicitly compare uncorrelated and correlated statistics. During the past decade research in the field of nonextensive thermodynamics (including Tsallis entropy) has demonstrated the existence of many statistical correlations in classical, nonlinear systems. When such correlations exist, the conventional classical upper limit on statistical correlations in Bell‐type experiments can easily be raised to overlap with quantum mechanical predictions involving correlated states such as the Bell singlet state, a favorite for deriving Bell inequalities. Thus, arguments based on experimental violations of Bell‐type inequalities, which rule out the existence of “local reality,” become moot. Perhaps quantum mechanics does have a deterministic, ontological basis, albeit one based in nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory. If so, deterministic chaos could provide Einstein’s longed‐for fundamental determinism, but because chaotic systems must be interpreted statistically, this also fits in quite well with the ideas of Bohr — Einstein and Bohr both could have been correct! It should be emphasized that the concept of nonlinear dynamics and chaos underpinning quantum mechanics does not involve hidden variables, nor does the fact that chaos is deterministic interlope on the existence of free will.

AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2007•0 citations

Nonlinearities in quantum mechanics

Wm. C. McHarris

Many of the paradoxes encountered in the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics can be shown to have plausible, more logical parallels in terms of nonlinear dynamics and chaos. These include the statistical exponential decay laws, interpretations of Bell's inequalities, spontaneous symmetry breaking, and perhaps diffractive behavior and even quantization itself. Many of the so-called alternative explanations of quantum mechanics have toyed with ideas that approach chaotic behavior, but as they were formulated before the advent of modern chaos theory, they remained within linear systems or at most nonlinear perturbations to linear systems; however, only strongly nonlinear systems can provide the proper parallels to the Copenhagen paradoxes. Several examples of these will be covered qualitatively. Strongly nonlinear behavior related to quantum mechanics does not involve "hidden variables," but chaos provides a bridge between the statistical behavior of quantum mechanics and deterministic behavior of classical mechanics. Perhaps both Einstein and Bohr were correct in their debates-chaos fundamentally provides the determinism so dear to Einstein, but in practice it must be interpreted statistically in the manner of Bohr.

Brazilian Journal of Physics•Jun 1, 2005•2 citations

Nonlinear Dynamics and Quantum Mechanics: Bell’s Theorem Meets Correlated Statistics

Wm. C. McHarris

A number of the paradoxes encountered in the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics have apparent resolutions through parallels based in nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory. An overview of these is presented, with Bell’s theorem treated in somewhat greater detail. In these conferences (both “Quantum Theory: Reconsiderations of Foundations” and “Foundations of Probability and Physics”) Bell’s theorem has already been attacked by a number of authors in a number of ways, but here I demonstrate that the so‐called “classical” (or hidden variables) side of the derivation of Bell‐type inequalities is flawed because it is usually based on standard, non‐correlated statistics. When correlated statistics (including nonextensive thermodynamics) is considered, the classical upper limit on correlations is raised, overlapping with quantum predictions using entangled states. Thus, many of the Bell‐type experiments are rendered moot in ruling out “local reality.” Nonlinear dynamics/chaos could well provide a bridge between the determinism of Einstein and the probability of the Bohr school. Possible nonlinear underpinnings for quantum mechanics could also have implications lowering the plausibility of quantum computing.

AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2006•0 citations

Quantum imponderables having parallels in nonlinear dynamics: indications of nonlinearities at the heart of quantum mechanics?

Wm. C. McHarris

Several of the imponderables associated with the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics have alternative, parallel explanations in terms of nonlinear dynamics and chaos. For example, an exponential law for processes such as radioactive decay can be obtained by iterating unimodal maps operating in chaotic domains, utilizing their extreme sensitivity to initial conditions. Such alternative explanations raise the question of the possibility of underlying nonlinearities in quantum mechanics. This is a ‘from the bottom up’, empirical approach to the question and will be compared with other, more theoretical, ‘from the top down’ investigations into the possibility of nonlinear extensions to quantum mechanics. Nonlinear dynamics, although deterministic, in its chaotic extreme provides only statistical information about the outcomes of state-space orbits. Thus in principle it provides the determinism so dear to Einstein; yet in practice it exhibits the probabilistic behaviour of Bohr. Perhaps Einstein and Bohr could both have been right.

Journal of Optics B Quantum and Semiclassical Optics•Jun 1, 2003•4 citations

Chaos and Quantum Mechanics

Salman Habib, Tanmoy Bhattacharya A, Benjamin D. Greenbaum +3 more

The relationship between chaos and quantum mechanics has been somewhat uneasy--even stormy, in the minds of some people. However, much of the confusion may stem from inappropriate comparisons using formal analyses. In contrast, our starting point here is that a complete dynamical description requires a full understanding of the evolution of measured systems, necessary to explain actual experimental results. This is of course true, both classically and quantum mechanically. Because the evolution of the physical state is now conditioned on measurement results, the dynamics of such systems is intrinsically nonlinear even at the level of distribution functions. Due to this feature, the physically more complete treatment reveals the existence of dynamical regimes--such as chaos--that have no direct counterpart in the linear (unobserved) case. Moreover, this treatment allows for understanding how an effective classical behavior can result from the dynamics of an observed quantum system, both at the level of trajectories as well as distribution functions. Finally, we have the striking prediction that time-series from measured quantum systems can be chaotic far from the classical regime, with Lyapunov exponents differing from their classical values. These predictions can be tested in next-generation experiments.

arXiv:quant-ph/0505085•Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences•Jun 1, 2005•24 citations

Microphysical reality and quantum formalism : proceedings of the Conference 'Microphysical Reality and Quantum Formalism', Urbino, Italy, September 25th - October 3rd, 1985

Microphysical Reality, Quantum Formalism, Alwyn van der Merwe +2 more

Quantum Measurements.- Quantum mechanics of macroscopic systems and measurement processes.- The haunted measurement in quantum theory.- A quantum-statistical model of quantum measurement.- Potential and real states in quantum mechanics.- Wave function collapse in the ensemble interpretation.- Nonlinear models for quantum-mechanical measurements.- Meaning and measurability of nonlocal quantum states.- New Developments of Quantum Theory.- The mathematical expression of the uncertainty principle.- Quantization of Hamiltonian theories based on a probability operator.- Classical to quantum: A generalized phase transition.- Quantum description of microscopic and microscopic systems: Old problems and recent investigations.- Towards a process formalism in quantum physics.- A generalized Schroedinger formalism from a Hamiltonian flow in a higher dimensional space.- How the nonlinear phenomena impose the reinterpretation of quantum mechanics.- On the equivalence between the superposition principle and a global gauge invariance.- Meanings of Quantum Theory.- The 2-photon elementary quantum phenomenon and spacetime structure.- Causality as indentified with conditional probability and the quantal nonseparability.- Realism versus positivism: An attempt at reconcilement in the Einstein-Bohr debate.- Four-dimensional realism and waves carrying physical data codedly as keys to understandable models.- Testing interpretations of quantum mechanics.- On the relation between the recent new statistical prediction of quantum mechanics by Albert, Aharonov, and D'Amato, the EPR reasoning, and Bell's Inequality.- Beyond quantum theory: A realist psycho-biological interpretation of physical reality.- Locality, causality, quantum events, and all that.- The Einstein-Bohr debate: I. The background.- Contingency and lawfulness: Conditions for encounter.- Epr Paradox: Critical Examinations.- Towards a realist theory of measurement.- The tacit postulate on single events and the comparison of classical and quantum spin correlation experiments.- Weak realism for pairs of correlated systems.- Comments on EPR, locality and reality.- The EPR and the proposal of action at a distance.- The discription of separated systems and quantum mechanics and a possible explanation for the probabilities of quantum mehanics.- Against dualism: An observation concerning non-locality.- Bell's theorem: A note on locality.- EPR paradox considered as a criticism of the statevector reduction in the quantum mechanical description of correlated separated systems.- EPR and the strange nature of the quantum state or why I can live with EPR.- Why the EPR paradox has been resolved in favor of Einstein.- Probability and the way out of the great quantum muddle.- Where lies the mistake in the clauser and Home proof of Bell's theorem?.

Kluwer Academic Publishers eBooks•Jan 1, 1988•3 citations
In recent years we have suggested that many of the so-called paradoxes resulting from the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics could well have more logical parallels based in nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory. Perhaps quantum mechanics might not be strictly linear as has been commonly postulated, and indeed, during the past year experimentalists have discovered signatures of chaos in a definitely quantum system. As an illustration of what can go wrong when quantum effects are forced into a linear interpretation, I examine Bell-type inequalities. In conventional derivations of such inequalities, classical systems are found to impose upper limits on the statistical correlations between, say, the properties of a pair of separated but entangled particles, whereas quantum systems allow greater correlations. Numerous experiments have upheld the quantum predictions (greater statistical correlations than allowed classically), which has led to inferences such as the instantaneous transmission of information between effectively infinitely separated particles — Einstein's "spooky action-at-a-distance," incompatible with relativity. I argue that there is nothing wrong with the quantum mechanical side of such derivations (the usual point of attack by those attempting to debunk Bell-type arguments), but implicit in the derivations on the classical side is the assumption of independent, uncorrelated particles. As a result, one is comparing uncorrelated probabilities versus conditional probabilities rather than comparing classical versus quantum mechanics, making moot the experimental inferences. Further, nonlinear classical systems are known to exhibit correlations that can easily be as great as and overlap with quantum correlations — so-called nonextensive thermodynamics with its nonadditive entropy has verified this with numerous examples. Perhaps quantum mechanics does contain fundamental nonlinear elements. Nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory could well provide a bridge between the determinism so dear to Einstein and the statisical interpretation of the Copenhagen school. Einstein and Bohr both could have been right in their debates.
Many of the so‐called paradoxes of orthodox quantum mechanics can be shown to have parallel, more logical interpretations in the realm of nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory. Among these are violations of Bell‐type inequalities, which in comparing “classical” mechanics with quantum mechanics implicitly compare uncorrelated and correlated statistics. During the past decade research in the field of nonextensive thermodynamics (including Tsallis entropy) has demonstrated the existence of many statistical correlations in classical, nonlinear systems. When such correlations exist, the conventional classical upper limit on statistical correlations in Bell‐type experiments can easily be raised to overlap with quantum mechanical predictions involving correlated states such as the Bell singlet state, a favorite for deriving Bell inequalities. Thus, arguments based on experimental violations of Bell‐type inequalities, which rule out the existence of “local reality,” become moot. Perhaps quantum mechanics does have a deterministic, ontological basis, albeit one based in nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory. If so, deterministic chaos could provide Einstein’s longed‐for fundamental determinism, but because chaotic systems must be interpreted statistically, this also fits in quite well with the ideas of Bohr — Einstein and Bohr both could have been correct! It should be emphasized that the concept of nonlinear dynamics and chaos underpinning quantum mechanics does not involve hidden variables, nor does the fact that chaos is deterministic interlope on the existence of free will.
Many of the paradoxes encountered in the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics can be shown to have plausible, more logical parallels in terms of nonlinear dynamics and chaos. These include the statistical exponential decay laws, interpretations of Bell's inequalities, spontaneous symmetry breaking, and perhaps diffractive behavior and even quantization itself. Many of the so-called alternative explanations of quantum mechanics have toyed with ideas that approach chaotic behavior, but as they were formulated before the advent of modern chaos theory, they remained within linear systems or at most nonlinear perturbations to linear systems; however, only strongly nonlinear systems can provide the proper parallels to the Copenhagen paradoxes. Several examples of these will be covered qualitatively. Strongly nonlinear behavior related to quantum mechanics does not involve "hidden variables," but chaos provides a bridge between the statistical behavior of quantum mechanics and deterministic behavior of classical mechanics. Perhaps both Einstein and Bohr were correct in their debates-chaos fundamentally provides the determinism so dear to Einstein, but in practice it must be interpreted statistically in the manner of Bohr.
A number of the paradoxes encountered in the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics have apparent resolutions through parallels based in nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory. An overview of these is presented, with Bell’s theorem treated in somewhat greater detail. In these conferences (both “Quantum Theory: Reconsiderations of Foundations” and “Foundations of Probability and Physics”) Bell’s theorem has already been attacked by a number of authors in a number of ways, but here I demonstrate that the so‐called “classical” (or hidden variables) side of the derivation of Bell‐type inequalities is flawed because it is usually based on standard, non‐correlated statistics. When correlated statistics (including nonextensive thermodynamics) is considered, the classical upper limit on correlations is raised, overlapping with quantum predictions using entangled states. Thus, many of the Bell‐type experiments are rendered moot in ruling out “local reality.” Nonlinear dynamics/chaos could well provide a bridge between the determinism of Einstein and the probability of the Bohr school. Possible nonlinear underpinnings for quantum mechanics could also have implications lowering the plausibility of quantum computing.
Several of the imponderables associated with the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics have alternative, parallel explanations in terms of nonlinear dynamics and chaos. For example, an exponential law for processes such as radioactive decay can be obtained by iterating unimodal maps operating in chaotic domains, utilizing their extreme sensitivity to initial conditions. Such alternative explanations raise the question of the possibility of underlying nonlinearities in quantum mechanics. This is a ‘from the bottom up’, empirical approach to the question and will be compared with other, more theoretical, ‘from the top down’ investigations into the possibility of nonlinear extensions to quantum mechanics. Nonlinear dynamics, although deterministic, in its chaotic extreme provides only statistical information about the outcomes of state-space orbits. Thus in principle it provides the determinism so dear to Einstein; yet in practice it exhibits the probabilistic behaviour of Bohr. Perhaps Einstein and Bohr could both have been right.
The relationship between chaos and quantum mechanics has been somewhat uneasy--even stormy, in the minds of some people. However, much of the confusion may stem from inappropriate comparisons using formal analyses. In contrast, our starting point here is that a complete dynamical description requires a full understanding of the evolution of measured systems, necessary to explain actual experimental results. This is of course true, both classically and quantum mechanically. Because the evolution of the physical state is now conditioned on measurement results, the dynamics of such systems is intrinsically nonlinear even at the level of distribution functions. Due to this feature, the physically more complete treatment reveals the existence of dynamical regimes--such as chaos--that have no direct counterpart in the linear (unobserved) case. Moreover, this treatment allows for understanding how an effective classical behavior can result from the dynamics of an observed quantum system, both at the level of trajectories as well as distribution functions. Finally, we have the striking prediction that time-series from measured quantum systems can be chaotic far from the classical regime, with Lyapunov exponents differing from their classical values. These predictions can be tested in next-generation experiments.
Quantum Measurements.- Quantum mechanics of macroscopic systems and measurement processes.- The haunted measurement in quantum theory.- A quantum-statistical model of quantum measurement.- Potential and real states in quantum mechanics.- Wave function collapse in the ensemble interpretation.- Nonlinear models for quantum-mechanical measurements.- Meaning and measurability of nonlocal quantum states.- New Developments of Quantum Theory.- The mathematical expression of the uncertainty principle.- Quantization of Hamiltonian theories based on a probability operator.- Classical to quantum: A generalized phase transition.- Quantum description of microscopic and microscopic systems: Old problems and recent investigations.- Towards a process formalism in quantum physics.- A generalized Schroedinger formalism from a Hamiltonian flow in a higher dimensional space.- How the nonlinear phenomena impose the reinterpretation of quantum mechanics.- On the equivalence between the superposition principle and a global gauge invariance.- Meanings of Quantum Theory.- The 2-photon elementary quantum phenomenon and spacetime structure.- Causality as indentified with conditional probability and the quantal nonseparability.- Realism versus positivism: An attempt at reconcilement in the Einstein-Bohr debate.- Four-dimensional realism and waves carrying physical data codedly as keys to understandable models.- Testing interpretations of quantum mechanics.- On the relation between the recent new statistical prediction of quantum mechanics by Albert, Aharonov, and D'Amato, the EPR reasoning, and Bell's Inequality.- Beyond quantum theory: A realist psycho-biological interpretation of physical reality.- Locality, causality, quantum events, and all that.- The Einstein-Bohr debate: I. The background.- Contingency and lawfulness: Conditions for encounter.- Epr Paradox: Critical Examinations.- Towards a realist theory of measurement.- The tacit postulate on single events and the comparison of classical and quantum spin correlation experiments.- Weak realism for pairs of correlated systems.- Comments on EPR, locality and reality.- The EPR and the proposal of action at a distance.- The discription of separated systems and quantum mechanics and a possible explanation for the probabilities of quantum mehanics.- Against dualism: An observation concerning non-locality.- Bell's theorem: A note on locality.- EPR paradox considered as a criticism of the statevector reduction in the quantum mechanical description of correlated separated systems.- EPR and the strange nature of the quantum state or why I can live with EPR.- Why the EPR paradox has been resolved in favor of Einstein.- Probability and the way out of the great quantum muddle.- Where lies the mistake in the clauser and Home proof of Bell's theorem?.