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

Annalen der Physik

Characterization of Entanglement via Non‐Existence of a Subquantum Random Field

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

Published Jul 22, 2024• 3 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Abstract Any pure state of a compound system with the state space determines a kind of covariance operator acting in the Cartesian product . If this operator is positively defined, then it determines a random field valued in . In this case compound quantum system can be treated as a classical random field system whose configuration space is not tensor, but Cartesian product space. It happens that and a subquantum process exists if and only if quantum state is not entangled. The technical framework used in this note is already presented by von Neumann.

DOI
10.1002/andp.202400035

Related papers

Demystification of quantum entanglement

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

One of the crucial differences between mathematical models of classical and quantum mechanics is the use of the tensor product of the state spaces of subsystems as the state space of the corresponding composite system. (To describe an ensemble of classical composite systems one uses random variables taking values in the Cartesian product of the state spaces of subsystems.) We show that, nevertheless, it is possible to establish a natural correspondence between the classical and quantum probabilistic descriptions of composite systems. Quantum averages for composite systems (including entangled) can be represented as averages with respect to classical random fields. It is essentially what Albert Einstein was dreamed of. Quantum mechanics is represented as classical statistical mechanics with infinite-dimensional phase space. While the mathematical construction is completely rigorous, its physical interpretation is a complicated problem (which will not be discussed in this paper).

arXiv:0905.4791•May 29, 2009•5 citations

Entangled states : Classical versus Quantum

S. Kanmani

Quantum mechanics of composite systems, gives rise to certain special states called entangled states. A physical system, that is in an entangled state displays an intricate correlation between its subsystems. There are also some composite quantum states (classically correlated states or separable states) that are not entangled. It is generally claimed, often without a rigorous proof to support, that these intricate correlations of an entangled state cannot occur in a classical system. This expository article, provides an elementary proof that entangled states cannot arise in the setting of classical mechanics. In addition, a detailed description of the origin of entanglement in quantum systems is included. The mathematical concepts that are necessary for this purpose are presented. The absence of entanglement in the classical setting is due to the fact that every pure classical state of a composite system is a product state, that is, a tensor product of two pure states of the subsystems. In contrast, there are pure composite quantum states that cannot be expressed in the form of a product state or even by a convex sum of product states. Roughly speaking, this is because classical states are positive valued functions on the phase-space while quantum states are positive linear operators. The structure of the tensor product between two commutative spaces of scalar valued functions is drastically different from that of the tensor product between two non-commutative spaces of linear operators. In other words, entanglement is a non-commutative phenomenon.

arXiv:0907.1784•Jul 10, 2009•0 citations

Can fluctuations of classical random field produce quantum averages?

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

Albert Einstein did not believe in completeness of QM. He dreamed of creation of prequantum classical statistical mechanics such that QM will be reproduced as its approximation. He also dreamed of total exclusion of corpuscules from the future model. Reality of Einstein's dream was pure fields' reality. Recently I made his dream come true in the form of so called prequantum classical statistical field theory (PCSFT). In this approach quantum systems are described by classical random fields, e.g., electromagnetic field (instead of photon), electron field or neutron field. In this paper we generalize PCSFT to composite quantum system. It is well known that in QM, unlike classical mechanics, the state of a composite system is described by the tensor product of state spaces for its subsystems. In PCSFT one can still use Cartesian product, but state spaces are spaces of classical fields (not particles). In particular, entanglement is nothing else than correlation of classical random fields, cf. again Einstein. Thus entanglement was finally demystified.

Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE•Aug 20, 2009•0 citations

Totality of Subquantum Nonlocal Correlations

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

In a series of previous papers we developed a purely field model of microphenomena, so called prequantum classical statistical field theory (PCSFT). This model not only reproduces important probabilistic predictions of QM including correlations for entangled systems, but it also gives a possibility to go beyond quantum mechanics (QM), i.e., to make predictions of phenomena which could be observed at the subquantum level. In this paper we discuss one of such predictions - existence of nonlocal correlations between prequantum random fields corresponding to {\it all} quantum systems. (And by PCSFT quantum systems are represented by classical Gaussian random fields and quantum observables by quadratic forms of these fields.) The source of these correlations is the common background field. Thus all prequantum random fields are "entangled", but in the sense of classical signal theory. On one hand, PCSFT demystifies quantum nonlocality by reducing it to nonlocal classical correlations based on the common random background. On the other hand, it demonstrates total generality of such correlations. They exist even for distinguishable quantum systems in factorizable states (by PCSFT terminology - for Gaussian random fields with covariance operators corresponding to factorizable quantum states).

arXiv:1102.4740•Feb 23, 2011•0 citations

Quantum correlations and dynamics from classical random fields valued in complex Hilbert spaces

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

One of the crucial differences between mathematical models of classical and quantum mechanics (QM) is the use of the tensor product of the state spaces of subsystems as the state space of the corresponding composite system. (To describe an ensemble of classical composite systems, one uses random variables taking values in the Cartesian product of the state spaces of subsystems.) We show that, nevertheless, it is possible to establish a natural correspondence between the classical and the quantum probabilistic descriptions of composite systems. Quantum averages for composite systems (including entangled) can be represented as averages with respect to classical random fields. It is essentially what Albert Einstein dreamed of. QM is represented as classical statistical mechanics with infinite-dimensional phase space. While the mathematical construction is completely rigorous, its physical interpretation is a complicated problem. We present the basic physical interpretation of prequantum classical statistical field theory in Sec. II. However, this is only the first step toward real physical theory.

Journal of Mathematical Physics•Aug 1, 2010•11 citations

Entanglement of Observables: Quantum Conditional Probability Approach

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov, Irina Basieva

Abstract This paper is devoted to clarification of the notion of entanglement through decoupling it from the tensor product structure and treating as a constraint posed by probabilistic dependence of quantum observable A and B. In our framework, it is meaningless to speak about entanglement without pointing to the fixed observables A and B, so this is AB-entanglement. Dependence of quantum observables is formalized as non-coincidence of conditional probabilities. Starting with this probabilistic definition, we achieve the Hilbert space characterization of the AB-entangled states as amplitude non-factorisable states. In the tensor product case, AB-entanglement implies standard entanglement, but not vise verse. AB-entanglement for dichotomous observables is equivalent to their correlation, i.e., $$\langle AB\rangle _{\psi} \not = \langle A\rangle _{\psi} \langle B\rangle _{\psi} .$$ ⟨ A B ⟩ ψ ≠ ⟨ A ⟩ ψ ⟨ B ⟩ ψ . We describe the class of quantum states that are $$A_{u} B_{u}$$ A u B u -entangled for a family of unitary operators (u). Finally, observables entanglement is compared with dependence of random variables in classical probability theory.

arXiv:2303.12393•Foundations of Physics•Sep 15, 2023•12 citations
Abstract Any pure state of a compound system with the state space determines a kind of covariance operator acting in the Cartesian product . If this operator is positively defined, then it determines a random field valued in . In this case compound quantum system can be treated as a classical random field system whose configuration space is not tensor, but Cartesian product space. It happens that and a subquantum process exists if and only if quantum state is not entangled. The technical framework used in this note is already presented by von Neumann.
One of the crucial differences between mathematical models of classical and quantum mechanics is the use of the tensor product of the state spaces of subsystems as the state space of the corresponding composite system. (To describe an ensemble of classical composite systems one uses random variables taking values in the Cartesian product of the state spaces of subsystems.) We show that, nevertheless, it is possible to establish a natural correspondence between the classical and quantum probabilistic descriptions of composite systems. Quantum averages for composite systems (including entangled) can be represented as averages with respect to classical random fields. It is essentially what Albert Einstein was dreamed of. Quantum mechanics is represented as classical statistical mechanics with infinite-dimensional phase space. While the mathematical construction is completely rigorous, its physical interpretation is a complicated problem (which will not be discussed in this paper).
Quantum mechanics of composite systems, gives rise to certain special states called entangled states. A physical system, that is in an entangled state displays an intricate correlation between its subsystems. There are also some composite quantum states (classically correlated states or separable states) that are not entangled. It is generally claimed, often without a rigorous proof to support, that these intricate correlations of an entangled state cannot occur in a classical system. This expository article, provides an elementary proof that entangled states cannot arise in the setting of classical mechanics. In addition, a detailed description of the origin of entanglement in quantum systems is included. The mathematical concepts that are necessary for this purpose are presented. The absence of entanglement in the classical setting is due to the fact that every pure classical state of a composite system is a product state, that is, a tensor product of two pure states of the subsystems. In contrast, there are pure composite quantum states that cannot be expressed in the form of a product state or even by a convex sum of product states. Roughly speaking, this is because classical states are positive valued functions on the phase-space while quantum states are positive linear operators. The structure of the tensor product between two commutative spaces of scalar valued functions is drastically different from that of the tensor product between two non-commutative spaces of linear operators. In other words, entanglement is a non-commutative phenomenon.
Albert Einstein did not believe in completeness of QM. He dreamed of creation of prequantum classical statistical mechanics such that QM will be reproduced as its approximation. He also dreamed of total exclusion of corpuscules from the future model. Reality of Einstein's dream was pure fields' reality. Recently I made his dream come true in the form of so called prequantum classical statistical field theory (PCSFT). In this approach quantum systems are described by classical random fields, e.g., electromagnetic field (instead of photon), electron field or neutron field. In this paper we generalize PCSFT to composite quantum system. It is well known that in QM, unlike classical mechanics, the state of a composite system is described by the tensor product of state spaces for its subsystems. In PCSFT one can still use Cartesian product, but state spaces are spaces of classical fields (not particles). In particular, entanglement is nothing else than correlation of classical random fields, cf. again Einstein. Thus entanglement was finally demystified.
In a series of previous papers we developed a purely field model of microphenomena, so called prequantum classical statistical field theory (PCSFT). This model not only reproduces important probabilistic predictions of QM including correlations for entangled systems, but it also gives a possibility to go beyond quantum mechanics (QM), i.e., to make predictions of phenomena which could be observed at the subquantum level. In this paper we discuss one of such predictions - existence of nonlocal correlations between prequantum random fields corresponding to {\it all} quantum systems. (And by PCSFT quantum systems are represented by classical Gaussian random fields and quantum observables by quadratic forms of these fields.) The source of these correlations is the common background field. Thus all prequantum random fields are "entangled", but in the sense of classical signal theory. On one hand, PCSFT demystifies quantum nonlocality by reducing it to nonlocal classical correlations based on the common random background. On the other hand, it demonstrates total generality of such correlations. They exist even for distinguishable quantum systems in factorizable states (by PCSFT terminology - for Gaussian random fields with covariance operators corresponding to factorizable quantum states).
One of the crucial differences between mathematical models of classical and quantum mechanics (QM) is the use of the tensor product of the state spaces of subsystems as the state space of the corresponding composite system. (To describe an ensemble of classical composite systems, one uses random variables taking values in the Cartesian product of the state spaces of subsystems.) We show that, nevertheless, it is possible to establish a natural correspondence between the classical and the quantum probabilistic descriptions of composite systems. Quantum averages for composite systems (including entangled) can be represented as averages with respect to classical random fields. It is essentially what Albert Einstein dreamed of. QM is represented as classical statistical mechanics with infinite-dimensional phase space. While the mathematical construction is completely rigorous, its physical interpretation is a complicated problem. We present the basic physical interpretation of prequantum classical statistical field theory in Sec. II. However, this is only the first step toward real physical theory.
Abstract This paper is devoted to clarification of the notion of entanglement through decoupling it from the tensor product structure and treating as a constraint posed by probabilistic dependence of quantum observable A and B. In our framework, it is meaningless to speak about entanglement without pointing to the fixed observables A and B, so this is AB-entanglement. Dependence of quantum observables is formalized as non-coincidence of conditional probabilities. Starting with this probabilistic definition, we achieve the Hilbert space characterization of the AB-entangled states as amplitude non-factorisable states. In the tensor product case, AB-entanglement implies standard entanglement, but not vise verse. AB-entanglement for dichotomous observables is equivalent to their correlation, i.e., ⟨AB⟩ψ≠⟨A⟩ψ⟨B⟩ψ.\langle AB\rangle _{\psi} \not = \langle A\rangle _{\psi} \langle B\rangle _{\psi} .⟨AB⟩ψ​=⟨A⟩ψ​⟨B⟩ψ​. ⟨ A B ⟩ ψ ≠ ⟨ A ⟩ ψ ⟨ B ⟩ ψ . We describe the class of quantum states that are AuBuA_{u} B_{u}Au​Bu​ A u B u -entangled for a family of unitary operators (u). Finally, observables entanglement is compared with dependence of random variables in classical probability theory.