In this chapter, we examine a different case study, where the aim was to unify apparently unrelated domains, such as quantum states, probability assignments, and logical inference. This is John von Neumann’s development of an alternative framework to the Hilbert space formalism he pioneered: one articulated in terms of his theory of operators and what we now call von Neumann algebras. This allowed him to accommodate probabilities in the context of systems with infinite degrees of freedom. Here we find, in addition to ‘top-down’ moves from the mathematics to the physics, ‘bottom-up’ developments from empirical features, to a particular logic and thence to mathematical structures. Through a combination of such moves, crucially involving exploration of the structural relations that hold between the mathematical and the physical domains, von Neumann articulated the kind of unification across such domains that represents a further important aspect of the application of mathematics.
In this chapter, we examine a different case study, where the aim was to unify apparently unrelated domains, such as quantum states, probability assignments, and logical inference. This is John von Neumann’s development of an alternative framework to the Hilbert space formalism he pioneered: one articulated in terms of his theory of operators and what we now call von Neumann algebras. This allowed him to accommodate probabilities in the context of systems with infinite degrees of freedom. Here we find, in addition to ‘top-down’ moves from the mathematics to the physics, ‘bottom-up’ developments from empirical features, to a particular logic and thence to mathematical structures. Through a combination of such moves, crucially involving exploration of the structural relations that hold between the mathematical and the physical domains, von Neumann articulated the kind of unification across such domains that represents a further important aspect of the application of mathematics.
. We put forward a new take on the logic of quantum mechanics, following Schrödinger's point of view that it is composition which makes quantum theory what it is, rather than its particular propositional structure due to the existence of superpositions, as proposed by Birkhoff and von Neumann. This gives rise to an intrinsically quantitative kind of logic, which truly deserves the name ‘logic’ in that it also models meaning in natural language, the latter being the origin of logic, that it supports automation, the most prominent practical use of logic, and that it supports probabilistic inference. The physics and the logic of quantum-ish logic. In 1932 John von Neumann formalized Quantum Mechanics in his book “Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik”. This was effectively the official birth of the quantum mechanical formalism which until now, some 75 years later, has remained the same. Quantum theory underpins so many things in our daily lives including chemical industry, energy production and information technology, which arguably makes it the most technologically successful theory of physics ever. However, in 1935, merely three years after the birth of his brainchild, von Neumann wrote in a letter to American mathematician Garrett Birkhoff: “I would like to make a confession which may seem immoral: I do not believe absolutely in Hilbert space no more.” (sic)—for more details see [73]. Soon thereafter they published a paper entitled “The Logic of Quantum Mechanics” [13]. Their ‘quantum logic’ was cast in order-theoretic terms, very much in the spirit of the then reigning algebraic view of logic, with the distributive law being replaced with a weaker (ortho)modular law. This resulted in a research community of quantum logicians [68, 71, 47, 30]. However, despite von Neumann's reputation, and the large body of research that has been produced in the area, one does not find a trace of this activity neither in the mainstream physics, mathematics, nor logic literature. Hence, 75 years later one may want to conclude that this activity was a failure. What went wrong? The mathematics of it. Let us consider the raison d'être for the Hilbert space formalism.
In 1933, Kolmogorov synthesized the basic concepts of probability that were in general use at the time into concepts and deductions from a simple set of axioms that said probability was a σ-additive function from a boolean algebra of events into [0, 1]. In 1932, von Neumann realized that the use of probability in quantum mechanics required a different concept that he formulated as a σ-additive function from the closed subspaces of a Hilbert space onto [0,1]. In 1935, Birkhoff & von Neumann replaced Hilbert space with an algebraic generalization. Today, a slight modification of the Birkhoff-von Neumann generalization is called “quantum logic”. A central problem in the philosophy of probability is the justification of the definition of probability used in a given application. This is usually done by arguing for the rationality of that approach to the situation under consideration. A version of the Dutch book argument given by de Finetti in 1972 is often used to justify the Kolmogorov theory, especially in scientific applications. As von Neumann in 1955 noted, and his criticisms still hold, there is no acceptable foundation for quantum logic. While it is not argued here that a rational approach has been carried out for quantum physics, it is argued that (1) for many important situations found in behavioral science that quantum probability theory is a reasonable choice, and (2) that it has an arguably rational foundation to certain areas of behavioral science, for example, the behavioral paradigm of Between Subjects experiments.
Quantum theory is the soul of contemporary physics. It was discovered in an adventurous way, under the urge to solve the puzzles posed by atomic spectra and blackbody radiation. But after its invention, it immediately became clear that it was not just a theory of specific physical systems: it was rather a new language of universal applicability. Already in 1928, the theory had received solid mathematical foundations by Hilbert, von Neumann, and Nordheim, and this work was brought to completion in the monumental work of von Neumann, in the form that we still study nowadays. The theory is extraordinarily successful, and its predictions have been confirmed to an astonishing level of precision in a large spectrum of experiments. However, almost 90 years after von Neumann's book, quantum theory remains mysterious. Its mathematical formulation – based on Hilbert spaces and self-adjoint operators – is far from having an intuitive interpretation. The association of physical systems to Hilbert spaces whose unit vectors represent pure states, the representation of transformations by unitary operators and of observables by self-adjoint operators – all such postulates look artificial and ad hoc . A slightly more operational approach is provided by the C * -algebraic formulation of quantum theory – still, this formulation relies on the assumption that observables form an algebra , where the physical meanings of the multiplication and the sum are far from clear. In short, the postulates of quantum theory impose mathematical structures without providing any simple reason for this choice: the mathematics of Hilbert spaces is adopted as a magic blackbox that “works well” at producing experimental predictions. However, in a satisfactory axiomatization of a physical theory the mathematical structures should emerge as a consequence of postulates that have a direct physical interpretation. By this we mean postulates referring, e.g., to primitive notions like physical system, measurement, or process, rather than notions like, e.g., Hilbert space, C * -algebra, unit vector, or selfadjoint operator. The crucial question thus remains unanswered: why quantum theory? Which are the principles at the basis of the theory? A case that is often invoked in contrast is that of Special Relativity theory, which directly follows from the simple understandable principle of relativity.
Quantum mechanics and the theory of operator algebras have been intertwined since their origin.In the 1930s [20] von Neumann laid the foundations for the theory of (what are now known as) von Neumann algebras with the explicit goal of establishing Heisenberg's matrix mechanics on a rigorous footing (quoting from the preface, in the translation by Beyer: "The object of this book is to present the new quantum mechanics in a unified representation which, so far as it is possible and useful, is mathematically rigorous").Following the initial explorations of Murray and von Neumann, the new theory took on a life of its own, eventually leading to multiple applications unrelated to quantum mechanics, such as to free probability or noncommutative geometry.In his 1976 paper completing the classification of injective von Neumann algebras [6] Connes made a casual
After a quarter century of discoveries that rattled the foundations of classical mechanics and electrodynamics, the year 1926 saw the publication of two works intended to provide a theoretical structure to support new quantum explanations of the subatomic world. Heisenberg's matrix mechanics and Schrodinger's wave mechanics provided compatible but mathematically disparate ways of unifying the discoveries of Planck, Einstein, Bohr and many others. Efforts began immediately to prove the equivalence of these two structures, culminated successfully by John von Neumann's 1932 volume Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. This forms the springboard for the current effort. We begin with a presentation of a minimal set of von Neumann postulates while introducing language and notation to facilitate subsequent discussion of quantum calculations based in finite dimensional Hilbert spaces. Chapters that follow address two-state quantum systems (with spin one-half as the primary example), entanglement of multiple two-state systems, quantum angular momentum theory and quantum approaches to statistical mechanics. A concluding chapter gives an overview of issues associated with quantum mechanics in continuous infinite-dimensional Hilbert spaces.
After a quarter century of discoveries that rattled the foundations of classical mechanics and electrodynamics, the year 1926 saw the publication of two works intended to provide a theoretical structure to support new quantum explanations of the subatomic world. Heisenberg's matrix mechanics and Schrodinger's wave mechanics provided compatible but mathematically disparate ways of unifying the discoveries of Planck, Einstein, Bohr and many others. Efforts began immediately to prove the equivalence of these two structures, culminated successfully by John von Neumann's 1932 volume Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. This forms the springboard for the current effort. We begin with a presentation of a minimal set of von Neumann postulates while introducing language and notation to facilitate subsequent discussion of quantum calculations based in finite dimensional Hilbert spaces. Chapters that follow address two-state quantum systems (with spin one-half as the primary example), entanglement of multiple two-state systems, quantum angular momentum theory and quantum approaches to statistical mechanics. A concluding chapter gives an overview of issues associated with quantum mechanics in continuous infinite-dimensional Hilbert spaces.