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

Journal of the Physical Society of Japan

Quantum mechanical observation

Mikio Namiki

Published Jan 1, 1996• 1 citation
OpenAlex

Related papers

Observation in quantum mechanics

H. S. Green

Il Nuovo Cimento•Sep 1, 1958•53 citations

Formalism

Shabnam Siddiqui

This chapter discusses the mathematical formalism of the theory of quantum mechanics and present the differences between the theory of classical mechanics and quantum mechanics. The mathematics that is used to account for the indeterminacy of quantum mechanics renders the mathematical approach of quantum mechanics distinct from that of classical mechanics. In quantum mechanics, any dynamical variable that is an observable that can be measured experimentally is described as a linear Hermitian operator. In quantum mechanics, it is not only necessary to define an observable, but it is also necessary to define the states associated with it. When a system is in a linear superposition of states of an observable, the number of different values of an observable observed in an experiment is equal to the number of states that a quantum mechanical system can jump into upon measurement of an observable.

CRC Press eBooks•Oct 10, 2018•0 citations

Quantum Mechanical Phenomena

Martin Pieper

Essentials•Jan 1, 2021•0 citations

Hidden human variables in quantum mechanics?

Göte Nyman

The problem of the observer in quantum mechanics is getting new human content. The paradox of Wigner's friend and its extended versions have observers who not only observe quantum phenomena, but communicate, have memories and even super-observer powers. Observers are represented by particle paths and state memories and advanced AI has been suggested to act as an observer. There is a new call for a solid theory of the observer in quantum mechanics. Two different branches of observer theories have emerged. The purely physical one is Heisenbergian, e.g. relational quantum mechanics where the observer is considered as any other physical quantum system. The other branch is psychologically rich as its observer has complex human faculties such as a mind, mental states and memory (Many minds), or the observer is considered as an active and experiencing agent, with continuously refreshed, scientific expectations (QBism). Is the human observer a special case, different from other quantum mechanical systems? Why is there no theory of the general observer in quantum mechanics? A historical summary is covered on how quantum mechanical interpretations have treated the observer, and the concept of hidden human variables is suggested to continue the discussion on the theoretical nature of the observer.

arXiv:2010.03419•Oct 6, 2020•0 citations

Classical theories and nonclassical theories as special cases of a more general theory

Dirk Aerts

We analyze the difference between classical mechanics and quantum mechanics. We come to the conclusion that this difference can be found in the nature of the observables that are considered for the physical system under consideration. Classical mechanics can only describe a certain kind of what we called ‘‘classical observable.’’ Quantum mechanics can only describe another kind of observable; it cannot describe, however, classical observables. To perform this analysis, we use a theory where every kind of observable can be treated and which is in a natural way a generalization of both classical and quantum mechanics. If in a study of a physical system in this theory we restrict ourselves to the classical observables, we rediscover classical mechanics as a kind of first study of the physical system, where all the nonclassical properties are hidden. If we find that this first study is too rough we can also study the nonclassical part of the physical system by a theory which is eventually quantum mechanics.

Journal of Mathematical Physics•Oct 1, 1983•76 citations

Quantum Phenomena

Springer eBooks•Dec 12, 2005•0 citations
This chapter discusses the mathematical formalism of the theory of quantum mechanics and present the differences between the theory of classical mechanics and quantum mechanics. The mathematics that is used to account for the indeterminacy of quantum mechanics renders the mathematical approach of quantum mechanics distinct from that of classical mechanics. In quantum mechanics, any dynamical variable that is an observable that can be measured experimentally is described as a linear Hermitian operator. In quantum mechanics, it is not only necessary to define an observable, but it is also necessary to define the states associated with it. When a system is in a linear superposition of states of an observable, the number of different values of an observable observed in an experiment is equal to the number of states that a quantum mechanical system can jump into upon measurement of an observable.
The problem of the observer in quantum mechanics is getting new human content. The paradox of Wigner's friend and its extended versions have observers who not only observe quantum phenomena, but communicate, have memories and even super-observer powers. Observers are represented by particle paths and state memories and advanced AI has been suggested to act as an observer. There is a new call for a solid theory of the observer in quantum mechanics. Two different branches of observer theories have emerged. The purely physical one is Heisenbergian, e.g. relational quantum mechanics where the observer is considered as any other physical quantum system. The other branch is psychologically rich as its observer has complex human faculties such as a mind, mental states and memory (Many minds), or the observer is considered as an active and experiencing agent, with continuously refreshed, scientific expectations (QBism). Is the human observer a special case, different from other quantum mechanical systems? Why is there no theory of the general observer in quantum mechanics? A historical summary is covered on how quantum mechanical interpretations have treated the observer, and the concept of hidden human variables is suggested to continue the discussion on the theoretical nature of the observer.
We analyze the difference between classical mechanics and quantum mechanics. We come to the conclusion that this difference can be found in the nature of the observables that are considered for the physical system under consideration. Classical mechanics can only describe a certain kind of what we called ‘‘classical observable.’’ Quantum mechanics can only describe another kind of observable; it cannot describe, however, classical observables. To perform this analysis, we use a theory where every kind of observable can be treated and which is in a natural way a generalization of both classical and quantum mechanics. If in a study of a physical system in this theory we restrict ourselves to the classical observables, we rediscover classical mechanics as a kind of first study of the physical system, where all the nonclassical properties are hidden. If we find that this first study is too rough we can also study the nonclassical part of the physical system by a theory which is eventually quantum mechanics.