In this chapter we develop the contextual approach to quantum mechanics.This approach matches with the views ofBohr who emphasized that the quantum description represents complexes ofexperimental physical conditions, in the modern terminology – experimentalcontexts. In this chapter we formalize the contextual approach on the basisof contextual probability theory which is closely connected with generalizedprobability theory (but interpretationally not identical with it). The contextualprobability theory serves as the basis of the contextual measurementmodel (CMM). The latter covers measurements in classical, quantum, andquasi-classical physics.
In this chapter we develop the contextual approach to quantum mechanics.This approach matches with the views ofBohr who emphasized that the quantum description represents complexes ofexperimental physical conditions, in the modern terminology – experimentalcontexts. In this chapter we formalize the contextual approach on the basisof contextual probability theory which is closely connected with generalizedprobability theory (but interpretationally not identical with it). The contextualprobability theory serves as the basis of the contextual measurementmodel (CMM). The latter covers measurements in classical, quantum, andquasi-classical physics.
We develop a contextual measurement model (CMM) that is used for the clarification of the quantum foundations. This model matches Bohr's views on the role of experimental contexts. CMM is based on a contextual probability theory that is connected with generalized probability theory. CMM covers measurements in classical, quantum and semi-classical physics. The CMM formalism is illustrated by a few examples. We consider the CMM framing of classical probability, the von Neumann measurement theory and the quantum instrument theory. CMM can also be applied outside of physics, e.g. in cognition, decision-making and psychology, the so-called quantum-like modelling.
In this chapter the contextual measurement model (CMM) is employed forprobabilistic structuring of classical and quantum physics. We start with CMM framing of classical probability theory (Kolmogorov 1933) servingas the basis of classical statistical physics and thermodynamics. Then weconsider the von Neumann quantum measurement theory with observablesgiven by Hermitian operators and the state update of the projective typeand represent it as CMM. The quantum instrument theory is a generalizationof the von Neumann theory permitting state updates of the non-projectivetype and it also can be represented as CMM. We also show connectionof the generalized probability theory with the space of probability measureswith CMM. Finally, linear space representation for contextual probabilityspace is constructed by using the construction going back to Mackey.
Interpretational paradoxes of quantum mechanics may be associated with the application of the structure of classical probability theory to systems whose probabilistic organization is fundamentally contextual. In this work, we propose an outline of an alternative probability theory in which the primary object is not an elementary outcome but a contextual whole—a class of alternatives defined by a common structural property. In this approach, probability is organized on two levels. The first level describes the probabilities of contextual wholes, while the second level describes the conditional probabilities of alternatives within those wholes. Individual alternatives do not possess autonomous probabilities outside their context. Their probabilities arise only as contextual projections of a more fundamental probabilistic structure. Within this model, quantum mechanics appears as a special case of a more general theory in which contextual wholes are described by superpositions of probability amplitudes. Classical probability theory emerges as a limiting case in which all contexts are mutually compatible and can be combined into a single global description. The proposed framework provides a possible conceptual foundation for understanding quantum probability, contextuality, interference, and hybrid probability distributions within a unified structure.
Most scholars maintain that quantum mechanics (QM) is a contextual theory and that quantum probability does not allow for an epistemic (ignorance) interpretation. By inquiring possible connections between contextuality and non-classical probabilities we show that a class TμMP of theories can be selected in which probabilities are introduced as classical averages of Kolmogorovian probabilities over sets of (microscopic) contexts, which endows them with an epistemic interpretation. The conditions characterizing TμMP are compatible with classical mechanics (CM), statistical mechanics (SM), and QM, hence we assume that these theories belong to TμMP. In the case of CM and SM, this assumption is irrelevant, as all of the notions introduced in them as members of TμMP reduce to standard notions. In the case of QM, it leads to interpret quantum probability as a derived notion in a Kolmogorovian framework, explains why it is non-Kolmogorovian, and provides it with an epistemic interpretation. These results were anticipated in a previous paper, but they are obtained here in a general framework without referring to individual objects, which shows that they hold, even if only a minimal (statistical) interpretation of QM is adopted in order to avoid the problems following from the standard quantum theory of measurement.
In quantum physics, the term ‘contextual’ can be used in more than one way. One usage, here called ‘Bell contextual’ since the idea goes back to Bell, is that if A , B and C are three quantum observables, with A compatible (i.e. commuting) with B and also with C , whereas B and C are incompatible, a measurement of A might yield a different result (indicating that quantum mechanics is contextual) depending upon whether A is measured along with B (the { A , B } context) or with C (the { A , C } context). An analysis of what projective quantum measurements measure shows that quantum theory is Bell non-contextual: the outcome of a particular A measurement when A is measured along with B would have been exactly the same if A had, instead, been measured along with C . A different definition, here called ‘globally (non)contextual’ refers to whether or not there is (non-contextual) or is not (contextual) a single joint probability distribution that simultaneously assigns probabilities in a consistent manner to the outcomes of measurements of a certain collection of observables, not all of which are compatible. A simple example shows that such a joint probability distribution can exist even in a situation where the measurement probabilities cannot refer to properties of a quantum system, and hence lack physical significance, even though mathematically well defined. It is noted that the quantum sample space, a projective decomposition of the identity, required for interpreting measurements of incompatible properties in different runs of an experiment using different types of apparatus, has a tensor product structure, a fact sometimes overlooked. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Contextuality and probability in quantum mechanics and beyond’.
We discuss different formal frameworks for the description of generalized probabilities in statistical theories. We analyze the particular cases of probabilities appearing in classical and quantum mechanics and the approach to generalized probabilities based on convex sets. We argue for considering quantum probabilities as the natural probabilistic assignments for rational agents dealing with contextual probabilistic models. In this way, the formal structure of quantum probabilities as a non-Boolean probabilistic calculus is endowed with a natural interpretation.