Some simple preliminaries are set out to guide the investigation of what work appeal to the concept of information might do for the foundations of quantum mechanics. One point noted is that if all that appeal to information were to signify in a given approach is the advocacy of an instrumentalist view, then we would not be left with a very interesting, or at least, not a very distinctive, position. Another is the warning that the factivity of ‘information’ (one can’t have the information that p unless it is the case that p) tightly constrains what a direct appeal to the notion of information can do for you in understanding the quantum state.
Some simple preliminaries are set out to guide the investigation of what work appeal to the concept of information might do for the foundations of quantum mechanics. One point noted is that if all that appeal to information were to signify in a given approach is the advocacy of an instrumentalist view, then we would not be left with a very interesting, or at least, not a very distinctive, position. Another is the warning that the factivity of ‘information’ (one can’t have the information that p unless it is the case that p) tightly constrains what a direct appeal to the notion of information can do for you in understanding the quantum state.
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).
Heisenberg offered an interpretation of the quantum state which made use of a quantitative version of an earlier notion, , of Aristotle by both referring to it using its Latin name,potentia, and identifying its qualitative aspect with . The relationship between this use and Aristotle's notion was not made by Heisenberg in full detail, beyond noting their common character: that of signifying the system's objective capacity to be found later to possess a property in actuality. For such actualization, Heisenberg requiredmeasurementto have taken place, an interaction with external systems that disrupts the otherwise independent, natural evolution of the quantum system. The notion of state actualization was later taken up by others, including Shimony, in the search for a law-like measurement process. Yet, the relation of quantum potentiality to Aristotle's original notion has been viewed as mainly terminological, even by those who used it thus. Here, I reconsider the relation of Heisenberg's notion to Aristotle's and show that it can be explicated in greater specificity than Heisenberg did. This is accomplished through the careful consideration of the role of potentia in physical causation and explanation, and done in order to provide a fuller understanding of this aspect of Heisenberg's approach to quantum mechanics. Most importantly, it is pointed out that Heisenberg's requirement of an external intervention during measurement that disrupts the otherwise independent, natural evolution of the quantum system is in accord with Aristotle's characterization of spontaneous causation. Thus, the need for a teleological understanding of the actualization of potentia, an often assumed requirement that has left this fundamental notion neglected, is seen to be spurious. This article is part of the themed issue ‘Second quantum revolution: foundational questions’.
The rapid rise of quantum information For the last four chapters I have been describing what may be called the ‘fundamental’ or ‘foundational’ aspects of quantum theory. I have been explaining what happens when you penetrate deeper into the ideas of quantum theory than when you merely make use of it, when you try to understand its basic meaning and what, if true, it tells us about the physical nature of the Universe. As I said in Chapter 5, once Bohr had given his approach to these matters in his Como paper of 1927, general opinion was that his views were sacrosanct, and that no self-respecting physicist needed to return to discuss them further. It was Bell's great achievement to dent this complacency at least a little, and from the very end of the 1960s for the next quarter of a century or so, there were a few experimentalists keen to test the Bell inequalities with increasing stringency, and a few theoreticians with fresh ideas about how quantum theory should be interpreted. While it was generally admitted that Bell's work was a genuine and important contribution to our understanding of quantum theory, and eventually the ideas actually reached some of the textbooks, in the 1970s and 1980s the field was still very much a minority interest, and even those who found it interesting would scarcely have felt that it had, or was likely to have in the foreseeable future, practical application.
In quantum mechanics, quantum nonseparability is at the core of philosophical debates regarding its meaning. In the context of the process matrix formalism, causal nonseparability characterises quantum processes (connecting the inputs and outputs of different local quantum operations) that are incompatible with any definite causal structure among interacting parties. One talks about indefinite causal orders. A famous example of causally nonseparable processes is called the quantum switch (QS). It is extensively studied in the literature in virtue of its simple architecture and its various implementations in laboratories.The present work will discuss the possible interpretations of the QS's causal nonseparability under the assumption that causal nonseparability is seen as pointing towards novel objective features of nature.It was first defended that a scientific realist approach towards the process matrix formalism, which is an operational theory generalising quantum mechanics, was as much legitimate as any possible antirealist reading, contrary to certain views found in the literature. The reason is that operational formalisms are ontologically and epistemically neutral.From there, the theoretical concepts of interest, namely causal nonseparability and its model-independent counterpart called noncausality, were analysed in more details, in order to highlight in what sense they are distinct from the standard notions of quantum nonseparability and nonlocality in quantum mechanics.The discussion then focused on noncausality. It was argued that noncausality has a strong connection with a notion of temporal nonlocality. In the same way that Bell nonlocality is given different underlying explanations depending on the details of the chosen quantum mechanics' account, noncausality pointing towards temporal nonlocality can be given a variety of underlying descriptions depending on the exact way to interpret the process matrix formalism.The last chapter focused precisely on this particular point, namely on the various ways to understand process matrices and causal nonseparability in a realist context. In order to explore the potential impact of causal nonseparability on spacetime,we shifted from the notion of (indefinite) causal structure to (indefinite) spatiotemporal ones. This shift was allowed under a set of reasonable assumptions regarding the properties of a physical spacetime manifold and the connection between an operational and relativistic notions of causal relations.While different readings were suggested for indefiniteness of spatiotemporal relations, we insisted in particular on an objective understanding appealing to the concept of metaphysical indeterminacy. It was argued that such an approach could prove useful in a more general theoretical context such as quantum gravity, while being already partly supported in standard quantum mechanics.
Quantum Information is the science that aims to use the unusual behavior of the microscopic world, governed by the laws of Quantum Mechanics, in order to improve the way in which we compute or communicate information. Though the first ideas in this direction come from the early 80’s, it is in the last decade when Quantum Information has suffered an spectacular development. It is impossible to resume in a paper like this one the importance and complexity of the field. Therefore, I will limit to briefly explain some of the initial ideas (considered classical by now), and to briefly suggest some of the modern lines of research. By the nature of this exposition, I have decided to avoid rigor and to concentrate more in ideas and intuitions. Anyhow, I have tried to provide with enough references, in such a way that an interested reader could find there proper theorems and proofs.