This thesis addresses aspects of quantum phase and sets out to draw attention to a collection of new and extend some not so new techniques utilizing Weyl's correspondence rule and its inverse. The phase formulation of quantum mechanics is as old as quantum mechanics itself and evolved over a period of two decades due to the contributions of H. Weyl \cite{Weyl1950}, E. P. Wigner \cite{Wigner1932}, H. Groenewold \cite{Groenewold1946} and J. E. Moyal \cite{Moyal1949}. Over the ensuing years the phase picture has matured into a practical analytical tool, and has generated a multitude of technical papers, reports, reviews, and expositions from many authors and commentators. One reason for its success is that it offers an intuitive picture of quantum mechanics owing to its \it{classical look and feel}, and it has made an impression, in one way or another, in many fields such as mathematical physics, quantum optics, and physical chemistry.The thesis opens with a brief history of classical phase space, tracing the possible origin of the term ``phase space itself, and chronicles the events leading to the conceptualization (and generalization) of quantum phase space. In Chapter 2 the Weyl correspondence is recast in terms of von Neumann's integral kernel transform and a heuristic analysis is given from this perspective. A characteristic of Weyl's correspondence rule and its inverse is that there are two inherent representations of the same operator. These have been referred to as the Weyl representation and Wigner representation and are related by a symplectic Fourier transform. For an arbitrary outer dyadic operator it is shown that the Weyl representation leads to the \it{modified} Gabor transform (known to Signal Processing), while the Wigner representation specializes to the Bargmann transform and a representation in terms of analytic functions. Calculating Weyl-Wigner (WW) transforms of products of
n operators, from first principles, has proved to be a technically difficult problem. However, with the machinery developed in Chapter 2 the problem is reduced to a straightforward algebraic exercise. Finally, forming an
s-parametrized generalization of Weyl's correspondence rule and focusing on the Weyl representation it is shown to lead to an intimate relationship with the relative state formalism \cite{Ban1998}. Weyl's correspondence rule is only applicable to operators and consequently state vectors
∣ψ⟩ are not represented in the usual formulation of quantum phase space. This problem is circumvented in Chapter 3 by introducing the notion of a normalized fixed state (or window) vector
∣φ0⟩ to form an outer dyadic product $\wh{\Psi} = |\psi\rangle\langle\varphi_0|$. The WW transform of this product under the action of the Weyl's rule is a complex valued function of real variables called a phase amplitude and denoted by the symbol
Ψ. The phase amplitudes have many (and sometimes surprising) properties. For example they: \begin{itemize} \item form the building blocks of Wigner functions
W by admitting a generalized Born rule
W=Ψ⋆Ψˉ, and as such can be considered to be a more fundamental objects than Wigner functions; \item superpose and interfere like the state vectors they represent; \item specialize to the Bargmann and Gabor transforms when a Gaussian window is chosen; \end{itemize} \ni In Chapter 4 further aspects of phase amplitudes are explored and discussed. For example it is shown that they: \begin{itemize} \item define phase state vectors which form an over complete set and are elements of a reproducing kernel Hilbert space; \item allow unitary ray representations of the group symmetries of translation, rotation and time reversal; \item evolve in phase under the influence of a propagator
R which is intimately related to the Wigner propagator
P. \end{itemize} Chapter 5 considers an extension of phase amplitudes to include systems with finitely many degrees of freedom. These are called spin amplitudes and are obtained by first forming the outer dyadic product of a spin state vector with an arbitrary fixed spin state vector, and then applying a finite-dimensional analogue of the WW transform. The spin amplitude operator is represented as an
n×n matrix, whose elements are products of the spin components of the spin and fixed state vectors. Two kinds of spin amplitudes are considered, arising on the sphere
S2 or on a
(2j+1) dimensional lattice. In the special case of spin-$\half$ systems it is shown that the spin amplitudes transform as spinors under rotations on both the sphere and lattice. As a physical application the spin amplitudes for a spin-$\half$ magnetic dipole are found for a Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) environment. Chapter 6 considers Schwinger's abstract approach to quantum mechanics which takes into account the inability to indefinitely compensate for fluctuations in the measurement process. The resulting measurement algebra provides a symbolic representation of the physical laws as opposed to the mathematical abstraction (of von Neumann and Dirac) that was justified \it{\'a posteriori} by being in agreement with experiment. Despite Schwinger's prolific work on the subject of measurement algebra, its interpretation in quantum phase remained an open issue. It is shown that the key to formulating a quantum phase in terms of the measurement operators and transformation functions is the determination of a suitable set of basis operators for an arbitrary measurement operator. Many new results follow as a consequence of expanding an arbitrary measurement operator in this basis. In Chapter 7 the quantum-classical interface is explored by considering Hamilton's principal function or action
S(q,v,t). Starting from a purely heuristic classical argument, a phase function
U(p,q,t) is derived in terms of the classical action and is shown to be proportional to the WW transform of the quantum evolution operator. This association leads to the transform \be U(p,q,t) = A(t) \int e^{ipv/\hbar} e^{iS(q,v,t)/\hbar} \; \rm{d}v, \ee which enables one, in principle, to deduce the Wigner functions of a given system when only the classical action is known. Simple physical systems are used to provide examples illustrating this approach.
Passing from finite phase spaces X to infinite ones yields many fascinating new phenomena, some of which even seem genuinely “emergent” in not having any finite dimensional shadow, approximate or otherwise. Nonetheless, practically all results in the previous chapter remain valid, typically after the inclusion of some technical condition(s) that restrict the almost unlimited freedom allowed by infinite sets. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Reichenbach's notion of common cause In what follows ( X, S, p ) denotes a classical Kolmogorovian probability space with Boolean algebra S of subsets of a set X (with respect to the set theoretic operations ∩, ∪ and A ⊥ = X\A as Boolean algebra operations) and with the probability measure p on S . (See the Appendix for a concise review of the basic concepts of measure theoretic probability theory.) Elements of S are called random events (elements of X are sometimes called (random) elementary events). It is common to assume in probability theory that p is a countably additive (also called σ-additive) and not just a finitely additive measure but the assumption of countable additivity is somewhat controversial in the philosophical literature. The distinction between countable and finite additivity will not play any role in Chapters 3–5, 7 and 9: the results presented are valid under the assumption of either finite or countable additivity. Countable additivity will play a role in Chapters 6 and 8, however, where the problem of correlations in nonclassical (quantum) probability spaces will be investigated, and where the quantum counterpart of p will be assumed to be countably additive (“normal” in the terminology of the theory von Neumann algebras). If S has a finite number of elements, then it is the power set P(X) of a set X having n ＜ ∞ elements denoted by a i ( i = 1, 2 … n ); in this case we write S n .
This document is an extended abstract of [Fri10b]. See [JNP + 10] for closely related results obtained by different methods. Quantum correlations in composite quantum systems. In the study of quantum entanglement and quantum correlations, one usually assumes that the state space of a composite quantum system is a tensor product HA ⊗ HB, so that the correlations take on the form P (a, b | x, y) = 〈ψ, (A a x ⊗ B b y)ψ〉. (1) with POVM observables Ax a and B y b. However, how is this justified from physical principles? Can we really be sure that this tensor product assumption is appropriate? One possible alternative assumption might be to say that a composite system is defined in terms of a joint Hilbert space H together with, for each site, a set of local observables on H, such that each observable located on the first site commutes with each observable located on the second site; in physical terms, this means that the observables located at different sites are compatible, and can in particular be measured jointly. This is the “commutativity assumption”. In the case of finite-dimensional case, this is effectively equivalent to the