The Reduction Formalism

Joshua Rosaler

I distinguish two types of reduction within the context of quantum-classical relations, which I designate "formal" and "empirical". Formal reduction holds or fails to hold solely by virtue of the mathematical relationship between two theories; it is therefore a two-place, a priori relation between theories. Empirical reduction requires one theory to encompass the range of physical behaviors that are well-modeled in another theory; in a certain sense, it is a three-place, a posteriori relation connecting the theories and the domain of physical reality that both serve to describe. Focusing on the relationship between classical and quantum mechanics, I argue that while certain formal results concerning singular limits as Planck's constant goes to zero have been taken to preclude the possibility of reduction between these theories, such results at most block reduction in the formal sense; little if any reason has been given for thinking that they block reduction in the empirical sense. I then briefly outline a strategy for empirical reduction that is suggested by work on decoherence theory, arguing that this sort of account remains a fully viable route to the empirical reduction of classical to quantum mechanics and is unaffected by such singular limits.

Angelo Bassi, G. C. Ghirardi, Davide G M Salvetti

Unlike standard quantum mechanics, dynamical reduction models assign no particular a priori status to `measurement processes', `apparata', and `observables', nor self-adjoint operators and positive operator valued measures enter the postulates defining these models. In this paper, we show why and how the Hilbert-space operator formalism, which standard quantum mechanics postulates, can be derived from the fundamental evolution equation of dynamical reduction models. Far from having any special ontological meaning, we show that within the dynamical reduction context the operator formalism is just a compact and convenient way to express the statistical properties of the outcomes of experiments.

Robin de la Llata

Gabriel Catren

Abstract. We argue that the classical description of a symplectic manifold endowed with a Hamil-tonian action of an abelian Lie group G and the corresponding quantum theory can be understood as different aspects of the unitary representation theory of G. To do so, we propose a conceptual analysis of formal tools coming from symplectic geometry (notably, Souriau’s moment map and the Mardsen-Weinstein symplectic reduction formalism) and group representation theory (notably Kirillov’s orbit method). The proposed argumentative line strongly relies on the conjecture pro-posed by Guillemin and Sternberg according to which “quantization commutes with (symplectic) reduction”. By using the generalization of this conjecture to non-zero coadjoint orbits, we argue that phase invariance in quantum mechanics and gauge invariance have a common geometric un-derpinning, namely the symplectic reduction formalism. This fact points towards a gauge-theoretic interpretation of Heisenberg indeterminacy principle. Key words: quantum mechanics; gauge theories; moment map; symplectic reduction. 1.