Introduction Quantum information theory is the study of how the peculiar features of quantum mechanics can be exploited for the purposes of information processing and transmission. A central theme of such a study is the ways in which quantum mechanics opens up possibilities that go beyond what can be achieved classically. This has in turn led to a renewed interest in, and a new perspective on, the differences between the classical and the quantum. Although much of the work along these lines has been motivated by quantum information theory – and some of it has been motivated by the conviction that quantum theory is essentially about possibilities of information processing and transmission – the results obtained, and the frameworks developed, have interest even for those of us who are not of that conviction. Indeed, much of the recent work echoes, and builds upon, work that predates the inception of quantum information theory. The significance of such work extends beyond the setting of quantum information theory; the work done on distinguishing the quantum from the classical in the context of frameworks that embrace both is something worthy of the attention of anyone interested in the foundational issues surrounding quantum theory. One of the striking features of quantum mechanics lies in its probabilistic character. A quantum state yields, not a definite prediction of the outcome of an experiment, but a probability measure on the space of possible outcomes. Of course, probabilities occur also in a classical context.
Introduction Quantum information theory is the study of how the peculiar features of quantum mechanics can be exploited for the purposes of information processing and transmission. A central theme of such a study is the ways in which quantum mechanics opens up possibilities that go beyond what can be achieved classically. This has in turn led to a renewed interest in, and a new perspective on, the differences between the classical and the quantum. Although much of the work along these lines has been motivated by quantum information theory – and some of it has been motivated by the conviction that quantum theory is essentially about possibilities of information processing and transmission – the results obtained, and the frameworks developed, have interest even for those of us who are not of that conviction. Indeed, much of the recent work echoes, and builds upon, work that predates the inception of quantum information theory. The significance of such work extends beyond the setting of quantum information theory; the work done on distinguishing the quantum from the classical in the context of frameworks that embrace both is something worthy of the attention of anyone interested in the foundational issues surrounding quantum theory. One of the striking features of quantum mechanics lies in its probabilistic character. A quantum state yields, not a definite prediction of the outcome of an experiment, but a probability measure on the space of possible outcomes. Of course, probabilities occur also in a classical context.
Recent developments in the mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics have brought the theory closer to that of classical probability and statistics. On the other hand, the unique character of quantum physics sets many of the questions addressed apart from those met classically in stochastics. Furthermore, concurrent advances in experimental techniques and in the theory of quantum computation have led to a strong interest in questions of quantum information, in particular in the sense of the amount of information about unknown parameters in given observational data or accessible through various possible types of measurements. This scenery is outlined (with an audience of statisticians and probabilists in mind).
Quantum information theory represents a rich subject of discussion for those interested in the philosphical and foundational issues surrounding quantum mechanics for a simple reason: one can cast its central concerns in terms of a long-familiar question: How does the quantum world differ from the classical one? Moreover, deployment of the concepts of information and computation in novel contexts hints at new (or better) means of understanding quantum mechanics, and perhaps even invites re-assessment of traditional material conceptions of the basic nature of the physical world. In this paper I review some of these philosophical aspects of quantum information theory, begining with an elementary survey of the theory, seeking to highlight some of the principles and heuristics involved. We move on to a discussion of the nature and definition of quantum information and deploy the findings in discussing the puzzles surrounding teleportation. The final two sections discuss, respectively, what one might learn from the development of quantum computation (both about the nature of quantum systems and about the nature of computation) and consider the impact of quantum information theory on the traditional foundational questions of quantum mechanics (treating of the views of Zeilinger, Bub and Fuchs, amongst others).
Quantum information theory represents a rich subject of discussion for those interested in the philosphical and foundational issues surrounding quantum mechanics for a simple reason: one can cast its central concerns in terms of a long-familiar question: How does the quantum world differ from the classical one? Moreover, deployment of the concepts of information and computation in novel contexts hints at new (or better) means of understanding quantum mechanics, and perhaps even invites re-assessment of traditional material conceptions of the basic nature of the physical world. In this paper I review some of these philosophical aspects of quantum information theory, begining with an elementary survey of the theory, seeking to highlight some of the principles and heuristics involved. We move on to a discussion of the nature and definition of quantum information and deploy the findings in discussing the puzzles surrounding teleportation. The final two sections discuss, respectively, what one might learn from the development of quantum computation (both about the nature of quantum systems and about the nature of computation) and consider the impact of quantum information theory on the traditional foundational questions of quantum mechanics (treating of the views of Zeilinger, Bub and Fuchs, amongst others).
Recent advances in quantum technology – from quantum computers and simulators to communication and metrology – have not only opened up a whole new world of applications but also changed the understanding of quantum theory itself. This text introduces quantum theory entirely from this new perspective. It does away with the traditional approach to quantum theory as a theory of microscopic matter, and focuses instead on quantum theory as a framework for information processing. Accordingly, the emphasis is on concepts like measurement, probability, statistical correlations, and transformations, rather than waves and particles. The text begins with experimental evidence that forces one to abandon the classical description and to re-examine such basic notions as measurement, probability, and state. Thorough investigation of these concepts leads to the alternative framework of quantum theory. The requisite mathematics is developed and linked to its operational meaning. This part of the text culminates in an exploration of some of the most vexing issues of quantum theory, regarding locality, non-contextuality, and realism. The second half of the text explains how the peculiar features of quantum theory are harnessed to tackle information processing tasks that are intractable or even impossible classically. It provides the tools for understanding and designing the pertinent protocols, and discusses a range of examples representative of current quantum technology.
Applications of quantum mechanics have led to many successful predictions and explanations of puzzling phenomena, and we now apply quantum mechanics to gain, process, and communicate information in novel ways. We can understand quantum mechanics by understanding how we have applied it. We should not seek agreement on the nature of the world it represents, because this theory does not itself represent the physical world (though its applications do help us to represent it better). When applied to a quantum state, quantum mechanics yields probabiities for physical events: both state and probability are objective--not because they represent elements of phyiscal reality, but because each exerts norrmative authority over the beliefs of anyone who accepts quantum mechanics and applies it relative to a physical situation they may (but need not) occupy. These events may be described by statements that are meaningful in an appropriate environmental context, and quantum mechanics can help one to say when that is. Measurement creates an appropriate context, so here the Born rule indirectly yields probabilities of measurement outcomes. The quantum state of a system does not "collapse" on measurement: a new state must be assigned relative to a physical situation in which information about the outcome is accessible. Understood this way, there is no measurement problem, and violations of Bell inequalities does not demonstrate "spooky" non-local action. Quantum field theories have no physical ontology of their own: a quantum field is a mathematical object in a model whose application helps us to improve and extend our descriptions of the world in other terms. We cannot realise the scenario of Wigner's friend and its recent extensions: but the data that provide overwhelming evidence for quantum mechanics are objective in the same sense as the relative measurement outcomes described in those scenarios.
Applications of quantum mechanics have led to many successful predictions and explanations of puzzling phenomena, and we now apply quantum mechanics to gain, process, and communicate information in novel ways. We can understand quantum mechanics by understanding how we have applied it. We should not seek agreement on the nature of the world it represents, because this theory does not itself represent the physical world (though its applications do help us to represent it better). When applied to a quantum state, quantum mechanics yields probabilities for physical events: both state and probability are objective—not because they represent elements of physical reality, but because each exerts normative authority over the beliefs of anyone who accepts quantum mechanics and applies it relative to a physical situation they may (but need not) occupy. These events may be described by statements (about values of magnitudes) that are meaningful in an appropriate environmental context, and quantum mechanics can help one to say when that is. Measurement creates an appropriate context, so here the Born rule indirectly yields probabilities of measurement outcomes. The quantum state of a system does not “collapse” on measurement: a new state must be assigned relative to a physical situation in which information about the outcome is accessible. Understood this way, there is no measurement problem, and violation of Bell inequalities does not demonstrate “spooky” non-local action. Quantum field theories have no physical ontology of their own: a quantum field is a mathematical object in a model whose application helps to improve and extend our descriptions of the world in other terms. We cannot realise the scenario of Wigner’s friend and its recent extensions: but the data that provide overwhelming evidence for quantum mechanics are objective in the same sense as the relative measurement outcomes described in those scenarios.