In this work we discuss the notion of observable - both quantum and classical - from a new point of view. In classical mechanics, an observable is represented as a function (measurable, continuous or smooth), whereas in (von Neumann's approach to) quantum physics, an observable is represented as a bonded selfadjoint operator on Hilbert space. We will show in the present part II and the forthcoming part III of this work that there is a common structure behind these two different concepts. If $\mathcal{R}$ is a von Neumann algebra, a selfadjoint element $A \in \mathcal{R}$ induces a continuous function $f_{A} : \mathcal{Q}(\mathcal{P(R)}) \to \mathbb{R}$ defined on the \emph{Stone spectrum} $\mathcal{Q}(\mathcal{P(R)})$ (\cite{deg3}) of the lattice $\mathcal{P(R)}$ of projections in $\mathcal{R}$. $f_{A}$ is called the observable function corresponding to $A$. The aim of this part is to study observable functions and its various characterizations.
In this work we discuss the notion of observable - both quantum and classical - from a new point of view. In classical mechanics, an observable is represented as a function (measurable, continuous or smooth), whereas in (von Neumann's approach to) quantum physics, an observable is represented as a bonded selfadjoint operator on Hilbert space. We will show in the present part II and the forthcoming part III of this work that there is a common structure behind these two different concepts. If R is a von Neumann algebra, a selfadjoint element A∈R induces a continuous function fA:Q(P(R))→R defined on the \emph{Stone spectrum} Q(P(R)) (\cite{deg3}) of the lattice P(R) of projections in R. fA is called the observable function corresponding to A. The aim of this part is to study observable functions and its various characterizations.
In the second part of our work on observables we have shown that quantum observables in the sense of von Neumann, i.e.bounded selfadjoint operators in some von Neumann subalgebra R of L(H), can be represented as bounded continuous functions on the Stone spectrum Q(R) of R. Moreover, we have shown that this representation is linear if and only if R is abelian, and that in this case it coincides with the Gelfand transformation of R. In this part we discuss classical observables, i.e. measurable and continuous functions, under the same point of view. We obtain results that are quite similar to the quantum case, thus showing up the common structural features of quantum and classical observables.
``Quantum'' stands for for the concepts (both operational and formal) which had to be added to classical physics in order to understand otherwise unexplainable observed phenomena such as the structure of the spectral lines in atomic spectra. While the basic part of classical mechanics deals with the (essentially) reversible dynamics, quantum required adding the notions of ``measurement'' and (possibly non-local) ``correlations'' to the discussion. Crucially, all this comes with a ``probabilistic calculus''. The corresponding mathematical formalism was considered to have reached maturity in [von Neumann 1932], but there are some manifest problems with that formalism: (i) While measurements are applied to physical systems, application of their formal counterpart (i.e. a self-adjoint linear operator) to the vector representing that state of the system in no way reflects how the state changes during the act of measurement. Analogously, the composite of two self-adjoint operators has no physical significance while in practice measurements can be effectuated sequentially. More generally, the formal types in von Neumann's formalism do not reflect the nature of the corresponding underlying concept at all! (ii) Part of the problem regarding the measurements discussed above is that in the von Neumann formalism there is no place for storage, manipulation and exchange of the classical data obtained from measurements. Protocols such as quantum teleportation involving these cannot be given a full formal description. (iii) The behavioral properties of quantum entanglement which for example enable continuous data exchange using only finitary communication are hidden in the formalism. In [Abramsky and Coecke 2004] we addressed all these problems, and in addition provided a purely categorical axiomatization of quantum mechanics. The concepts of the abstract quantum mechanics are formulated relative to a strongly compact closed category with biproducts (of which the category FdHilb of finite dimensional Hilbert spaces and linear maps is an example). Preparations, measurements, either destructive or not, classical data exchange are all morphisms in that category, and their types fully reflect their kinds. Correctness properties of standard quantum protocols can be abstractly proven. Surprisingly, in this seemingly purely qualitative setting even the quantitative Born rule arises, that is the rule which tells you how to calculate the probabilities. Indeed, each such category has as endomorphism Hom of the tensor unit an abelian semiring of `scalars', and a special subset of these scalars will play the role of weights: each scalar induces a natural transformation which propagates through physical processes, and when a `state' undergoes a `measurement', the composition of the corresponding morphisms gives rise to the weight. Hence the probabilistic weights live within the category of processes. J. von Neumann. Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik. Springer-Verlag (1932). English translation in Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Princeton University Press (1955). S. Abramsky and B. Coecke. A categorical semantics of quantum protocols. In the proceedings of LiCS'04 (2004). An extended version is available at arXiv:quant-ph/0402130 A more reader friendly version entitled `Quantum information flow, concretely, abstractly' is at http://www.vub.ac.be/CLEA/Bob/Papers/QPL.pdf
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.
Although• quantum mechanics has achieved great success in the explanation of physical phenomena, the mathematics used in quantum mechanics is not rigorous.Unrigorous treatments occur in the case of continuous spectrum.In a Hilbert • space, let A be a self-adjoint operator.When we define the eigenvalue and the eigenelement by the ' ' relation Af=J.f, (1) ' ' h d -. -f(q)=).f(q)2m dq has solutions 2,ri f(q)=ce"Aq for any ;.., But these are not quadratically integrable.E. Hellinger and H. Weyi< 0 have already investigated the problem of continuous spectrum and introduced the " eigendifferential."But they are concerned with a special problem, i. e. bounded quadratic forms and solutions of differential equation.In respect of generality, they do not satisfy.< 2 > E. Fues< 3 > and some other writers<" have used this conception " eigendifferential " in quantum mechanics.But the treatments are either complicated or not rigorous.J. v. Neumann< 5 > has proved that in Hilbert space, for any selfadjoint operator A, there exists a resolution of identity E(;..) such that Af= J:and he has applied this theory to quantum mechanics.Although his theory gave a rigorous mathematical foundation to quantum mechanics, it did not give any interpretation to the representation theory of Dirac's form.Recently I investigated the "theory of vector-valued set functions."This theory removes the difficulties in the treatement of continuous spectrum, and gives a rigorous interpretation to the representation theory.< 5 > The vector-valued set function q(U) is a function of set U, and its functional value is an element (vector) in the Hilbert ,space, (1) E. Hellinger [l], 231-271.H. Weyl [1], 238-251.(2) T. Carlemann used this conception "eigendifferential" in the treatise of singular integral equations.Cf.T. Carlemann [1].(3) E. Fues [1], 295-303.(4) For example, L. de Broglie [2], 140-159.(5) J. v. Neumann [1], 53-121.(6) F. Maeda [2], [5], [6].A summary of the theory of vector-valued set functions is given in the first part Qf the present paper.(1) G. Temple has formulated a principle of quantum theory in which projective operators are given priority over self-adjoint operators.(C(.G. Temple [1)).But. the .whole discussion differs from that of my present paper.
Observables of a quantum system, described by self-adjoint operators in a von Neumann algebra or affiliated with it in the unbounded case, form a conditionally complete lattice when equipped with the spectral order. Using this order-theoretic structure, we develop a new perspective on quantum observables. In this first paper (of two), we show that self-adjoint operators affiliated with a von Neumann algebra can equivalently be described as certain real-valued functions on the projection lattice of the algebra, which we call q-observable functions. Bounded self-adjoint operators correspond to q-observable functions with compact image on non-zero projections. These functions, originally defined in a similar form by de Groote, are most naturally seen as adjoints (in the categorical sense) of spectral families. We show how they relate to the daseinisation mapping from the topos approach to quantum theory. Moreover, the q-observable functions form a conditionally complete lattice which is shown to be order-isomorphic to the lattice of self-adjoint operators with respect to the spectral order. In a subsequent paper, we will give an interpretation of q-observable functions in terms of quantum probability theory, and using results from the topos approach to quantum theory, we will provide a joint sample space for all quantum observables.
This chapter reminds, without entering into details, the main mathematical concepts and results relevant for finite system quantum mechanics. The basic postulates single out a Hilbert space of wave functions with self-adjoint linear operators corresponding to observables as was originally discovered by von Neumann. The chapter connects the contemporary terminology of linear Hilbert space operators with quantum physics. Important concepts like linear operators, measures, self-adjointness, spectral measures, density matrices, and tensor products are discussed and illustrated in the light of observables, probability for quantum systems and composite systems. A first example of a useful algebra of observables, the Weyl algebra, is described in detail and linked to the classical phase space of a point particle.