We give an axiomatic formulation of quantum structures like semilogics and quasilogics which generalize the boolean semirings of events and fuzzy logics. The notions of distributions, states, representations observables and semiobservables are introduced and their Hilbert space realizations are found. The closed and open structures in semilogics are introduced and the regular distributions on the semilogics are studied.
We give an axiomatic formulation of quantum structures like semilogics and quasilogics which generalize the boolean semirings of events and fuzzy logics. The notions of distributions, states, representations observables and semiobservables are introduced and their Hilbert space realizations are found. The closed and open structures in semilogics are introduced and the regular distributions on the semilogics are studied.
Abstract The paper, summarizing the results of recent papers of the author, is devoted to a detailed analysis of postulates of nonrelativistic quantum theory appearing within two classical axiomatic frameworks the “quantum logic” and the “algebraic approach” respectively, which are presently the two main alternatives for quantum axiomatics. The first part of the paper concerns the structure of two important sets, the set of questions (propositional logic) and the set of pure states. It is shown how the quantum logic axiomatic scheme can be modified and improved in order to overcome the well known troubles connected with the lack of satisfactory physical justification for some postulates of this approach. In particular, an axiom system is developed, related closely to the quantum logic axiomatic scheme, in which the questions of the complete lattice structure, the atomisticity, and the validity of the covering law in the propositional logic do not appear so problematic. The particular attention is directed to the covering law, which is here obtained as a consequence of physically clear properties of the experimental procedures (“filters”) associated with the quantum‐mechanical propositions. In Section 1.5 we formulate an axiom system for quantum mechanics based exclusively on the concepts of pure state, transition probability, and pure filter. In the second part of the paper the axiomatic scheme presented in Part 1 is developed with the aim to analyse the algebraic structure of some subspaces of the set of simple observables. The quantum logic axiomatic framework is here shown closely connected with the Jordan‐Banach algebraic scheme. In the third part of the paper, similarly as it was done in Parts 1 and 2, the correspondence between the propositions and the experimental (measuring) procedures verifying these propositions is put as the basic assumption of the axiomatization of quantum mechanics. As a consequence of this assumption, there is established the structure of a real Jordan‐Banach algebra in the set Ob of the bounded observables associated with a physical system, so that we can apply the GNS representation theorem proved recently for such algebras by Alfsen et al. (1978) to obtain the Hilbert space (or, to be more precise, the C*‐algebraic) representation for Ob.
According to quantum mechanics, the pure states of a microsystem are represented by vectors in a Hilbert Space. Sentences of the form, "x є L" (where x is the state vector for a system, L a subspace of the appropriate Hilbert space), may be called Q-propositions: such sentences serve to summarise our information about the results of possible experiments on the system. Quantum logic investigates the relations which hold among the Q-propositions about a given physical sys tem. These logical relations correspond to algebraic relations among the subspaces of Hilbert space. The algebra of this set of subspaces is non-Boolean, and may be regarded either as an orthomodular lattice or as a partial Boolean algebra. With each type of structure we can associate a logic. A general approach to the semantics for such a logic is provided in terms of interpretations of a formal language within an algebraic structure; an interpretation maps sentences of the language homomorphically onto elements of the structure. When the structure in question is a Boolean algera, the resulting logic is classical; here we develop a semantics for the logic associated with partial Boolean algebras. Two systems of proof, based on the natural deduction systems of Gentzen, are shown for this logic. With respect to the given sematics, these calculi are sound and weakly complete. Strong completeness is conjectured. Quantum logic deals with the logical relations between sentences, and so is properly called a logic. However, it is the logic appropriate to a limited class of sentences: proposals that it should replace classical logic wherever the latter is used should be viewed with suspicion.
Tlic classical Kohnogorov's model of probability assumes that every pair of ev(Tits is siinult.aneouslyobservable.This principle is violated in several applications including quantum mechanics, artificial intelligence, psychology, sociology etc.In these areas iioneoinpatible events are encountered.These are events which can be observed separately, but not simultaneously, so they are not contained in a Boolean subalgebra i = classical subsystem) of the event structure describing the system in question.Various attempts have been made to generalize the probability theory to a more general structure admitting noneonipatibility.Among them, classes of subsets (more generally, concrete logics) wore studied for many years (see e.g.[15, 18]).Although some results were successfully generalized (see e.g.[4. 10, 19]).the theory proceeded slowly and with serious difficulties.Hero we introduce a more special-but still reasonably general-structure, a kernel logic.As it is described in terms of Boolean algebras using measure-theoretic notions, we believe that there is a greater chance to generalize classical results for Boolean algebras to kernel logics.Kernel logics seem to be interesting also from the algebraic point of view as a new const ruction technique for concrete logics.Its usefulness was proved by solutions of several quite nontrivial problems.Besides this, it scorns desirable to describe kernels of measures on Boolean algebras.
An axiomatic mathematical structure is presented in terms of which arbitrary mathematical models of a physical system can be rigorously formulated and studied. Physical systems, observables, and states all arise in a natural way from the primitive notion of a physical operation. In particular, the structure is independent of the special mathematical completion defined by the quantum mechanical model, since no lattice theoretical or Hilbert space assumptions are used. The precise relationship between the present structure and the usual quantum mechanical model is investigated in a succeeding paper.
This paper shows that the non-Boolean logic of quantum measurements is more naturally represented by a relatively new 4-operation system of Boolean fractions—conditional events—than by the standard representation using Hilbert Space. After the requirements of quantum mechanics and the properties of conditional event algebra are introduced, the quantum concepts of orthogonality, completeness, simultaneous verifiability, logical operations, and deductions are expressed in terms of conditional events thereby demonstrating the adequacy and efficacy of this formulation. Since conditional event algebra is nearly Boolean and consists merely of ordered pairs of standard events or propositions, quantum events and the so-called “superpositions” of states need not be mysterious, and are here fully explicated. Conditional event algebra nicely explains these non-standard “superpositions” of quantum states as conjunctions or disjunctions of conditional events, Boolean fractions, but does not address the so-called “entanglement phenomena” of quantum mechanics, which remain physically mysterious. Nevertheless, separating the latter phenomena from superposition issues adds clarity to the interpretation of quantum entanglement, the phenomenon of influence propagated at faster than light speeds. With such treacherous possibilities present in all quantum situations, an observer has every reason to be completely explicit about the environmental–instrumental configuration, the conditions present when attempting quantum measurements. Conditional event algebra allows such explication without the physical and algebraic remoteness of Hilbert space.