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

Physics Essays

Conservation Laws and Deterministic Evolutions

María Esther Burgos

Published Mar 1, 1994• 6 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.4006/1.3029115

Related papers

Conservation laws and evolution of pure states into mixed states

Jun Liu

Physics Letters B•Sep 1, 1993•2 citations

Dynamical Evolution

Bassano Vacchini

Graduate texts in physics•Jan 1, 2024•0 citations

Deterministic Instability and the Destruction of Macroscopic Trajectories Under Fixed Constraints

Marriam Naeem

Deterministic microscopic laws constrain physical systems through conservation laws and boundary conditions, yet macroscopic evolution routinely exhibits irreversible collapse, destruction, and path dependence. We analyze deterministic classical and quantum systems admitting multiple metastable macroscopic trajectories under fixed global constraints and show that deterministic dynamics generally underdetermine macroscopic history. We introduce a distinction between constraint-defined macroscopic equivalence classes, fixed by invariant quantities, and metastable macroscopic trajectories, defined by dynamical stability. Using stability and basin-of-attraction arguments, we characterize collapse as a deterministic loss of metastability in which an entire macroscopic trajectory becomes dynamically inaccessible without violation of microscopic reversibility or conservation laws. Irreversible destruction corresponds to elimination of physically realizable paths rather than loss of information or coarse-grained inaccessibility. We show that explanations based solely on coarse-graining or decoherence are insufficient to account for such trajectory elimination, as they preserve admissibility of erased histories. In contrast, instability-driven trajectory destruction constitutes an ontic dynamical process, directly realized in many-body and condensed matter systems. The framework provides a unified account of irreversible macroscopic change and causal differentiation within deterministic dynamics, without invoking stochasticity, modified laws, or observer-dependent mechanisms. Deterministic laws constrain admissible macroscopic states, while instability and metastability govern the physically realizable histories connecting them.

•Jan 6, 2026•0 citations

The Ontology Conservation Law as an Alternative to the Many World Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

Gerard ’t Hooft

A sharper formulation is presented for an interpretation of quantum mechanics advocated by author. As an essential element we put forward conservation laws concerning the ontological nature of a variable, and the uncertainties concerning the realisation of states. Quantum mechanics can then be treated as a device that combines statistics with mechanical, deterministic laws, such that uncertainties are passed on from initial states to final states.

arXiv:1904.12364•Apr 28, 2019•6 citations

Stochastic locality and conservation laws

Dennis Dieks

Lettere al nuovo cimento della societa italiana di fisica/Lettere al nuovo cimento•Nov 1, 1983•3 citations

Relations among elements of the density matrix. II. Exotic conservation laws

James L Park, William Band

Ordinary quantal conservation laws are associated with null operators for time rate of change and are valid for causal evolution of the system through either pure or mixed states. There is, however, a larger class of quantal constants of the motion, some of which are conserved only for pure state evolution. After an analysis of the theoretical origins of these exotic conserved quantities, several illustrations are presented with empirical interpretations based on the quorum theory methods used in Paper I.

Journal of Mathematical Physics•Jun 1, 1973•2 citations
Deterministic microscopic laws constrain physical systems through conservation laws and boundary conditions, yet macroscopic evolution routinely exhibits irreversible collapse, destruction, and path dependence. We analyze deterministic classical and quantum systems admitting multiple metastable macroscopic trajectories under fixed global constraints and show that deterministic dynamics generally underdetermine macroscopic history. We introduce a distinction between constraint-defined macroscopic equivalence classes, fixed by invariant quantities, and metastable macroscopic trajectories, defined by dynamical stability. Using stability and basin-of-attraction arguments, we characterize collapse as a deterministic loss of metastability in which an entire macroscopic trajectory becomes dynamically inaccessible without violation of microscopic reversibility or conservation laws. Irreversible destruction corresponds to elimination of physically realizable paths rather than loss of information or coarse-grained inaccessibility. We show that explanations based solely on coarse-graining or decoherence are insufficient to account for such trajectory elimination, as they preserve admissibility of erased histories. In contrast, instability-driven trajectory destruction constitutes an ontic dynamical process, directly realized in many-body and condensed matter systems. The framework provides a unified account of irreversible macroscopic change and causal differentiation within deterministic dynamics, without invoking stochasticity, modified laws, or observer-dependent mechanisms. Deterministic laws constrain admissible macroscopic states, while instability and metastability govern the physically realizable histories connecting them.
Ordinary quantal conservation laws are associated with null operators for time rate of change and are valid for causal evolution of the system through either pure or mixed states. There is, however, a larger class of quantal constants of the motion, some of which are conserved only for pure state evolution. After an analysis of the theoretical origins of these exotic conserved quantities, several illustrations are presented with empirical interpretations based on the quorum theory methods used in Paper I.