A unified conceptual foundation of classical and quantum physics is given, free of undefined terms. Ensembles are defined by extending the `probability via expectation' approach of Whittle to noncommuting quantities. This approach carries no connotations of unlimited repeatability; hence it can be applied to unique systems such as the universe. Precise concepts and traditional results about complementarity, uncertainty and nonlocality follow with a minimum of technicalities. Probabilities are introduced in a generality supporting so-called effects (i.e., fuzzy events). States are defined as partial mappings that provide reference values for certain quantities. An analysis of sharpness properties yields well-known no-go theorems for hidden variables. By dropping the sharpness requirement, hidden variable theories such as Bohmian mechanics can be accommodated, but so-called ensemble states turn out to be a more natural realization of a realistic state concept. The weak law of large numbers explains the emergence of classical properties for macroscopic systems.
A unified conceptual foundation of classical and quantum physics is given, free of undefined terms. Ensembles are defined by extending the `probability via expectation' approach of Whittle to noncommuting quantities. This approach carries no connotations of unlimited repeatability; hence it can be applied to unique systems such as the universe. Precise concepts and traditional results about complementarity, uncertainty and nonlocality follow with a minimum of technicalities. Probabilities are introduced in a generality supporting so-called effects (i.e., fuzzy events). States are defined as partial mappings that provide reference values for certain quantities. An analysis of sharpness properties yields well-known no-go theorems for hidden variables. By dropping the sharpness requirement, hidden variable theories such as Bohmian mechanics can be accommodated, but so-called ensemble states turn out to be a more natural realization of a realistic state concept. The weak law of large numbers explains the emergence of classical properties for macroscopic systems.
A philosophically consistent axiomatic approach to classical and quantum mechanics is given. The approach realizes a strong formal implementation of Bohr's correspondence principle. In all instances, classical and quantum concepts are fully parallel: the same general theory has a classical realization and a quantum realization. Extending the ''probability via expectation'' approach of Whittle to noncommuting quantities, this paper defines quantities, ensembles, and experiments as mathematical concepts and shows how to model complementarity, uncertainty, probability, nonlocality and dynamics in these terms. The approach carries no connotation of unlimited repeatability; hence it can be applied to unique systems such as the universe. Consistent experiments provide an elegant solution to the reality problem, confirming the insistence of the orthodox Copenhagen interpretation on that there is nothing but ensembles, while avoiding its elusive reality picture. The weak law of large numbers explains the emergence of classical properties for macroscopic systems.
In this sequence of papers, noncommutative analysis is used to give a consistent axiomatic approach to a unified conceptual foundation of classical and quantum physics. The present Part I defines the concepts of observables, states and ensembles, clarifies the logical relations and operations for them, and shows how they give rise to dynamics and probabilities. States are identified with maximal consistent sets of weak equalities in the algebra of observables (instead of, as usual, with the rays in a Hilbert space). This leads to a concise foundation of quantum mechanics, free of undefined terms, separating in a clear way the deterministic and the stochastic features of quantum physics. The traditional postulates of quantum mechanics are derived from well-motivated axiomatic assumptions. No special quantum logic is needed to handle the peculiarities of quantum mechanics. Foundational problems associated with the measurement process, such as the reduction of the state vector, disappear. The new interpretation of quantum mechanics contains `elements of physical reality' without the need to introduce a classical framework with hidden variables. In particular, one may talk about the state of the universe without the need of an external observer and without the need to assume the existence of multiple universes.
A philosophically consistent axiomatic approach to classical and quantum mechanics is given. The approach realizes a strong formal implementation of Bohr's correspondence principle. In all instances, classical and quantum concepts are fully parallel: the same general theory has a classical realization and a quantum realization. Extending the `probability via expectation' approach of Whittle to noncommuting quantities, this paper defines quantities, ensembles, and experiments as mathematical concepts and shows how to model complementarity, uncertainty, probability, nonlocality and dynamics in these terms. The approach carries no connotation of unlimited repeatability; hence it can be applied to unique systems such as the universe. Consistent experiments provide an elegant solution to the reality problem, confirming the insistence of the orthodox Copenhagen interpretation on that there is nothing but ensembles, while avoiding its elusive reality picture. The weak law of large numbers explains the emergence of classical properties for macroscopic systems.
In this chapter, we consider the way quantum theory represents deterministic, statistical, and probabilistic aspects of Nature. After a discussion in Section 3.1 of uncertainty in general, we discuss in Sections 3.2-3.4 several formal notions of classical probability, their relation to the probability concept used in applied statistics, and their dependence on the description used. Section 3.5 briefly discusses various examples, where probabilistic features emerge from fully deterministic situations-a theme to be taken up in much more detail in Chapter 11. Section 3.6 then shows how the statistical aspects of the quantum formalism naturally follow from the weak law of large numbers. The notions of c-probability in the classical case and of q-probability in the quantum case are formally defined in Section 3.7. Historically, the concept of classical probability (including its use in stochastic processes) was given an undisputed formal mathematical foundation in 1933 in terms of the measure-theoretic setting of Kolmogorov [164]. Apart from this traditional axiomatic foundation of classical probability theory, there is a less well-known equivalent axiomatic treatment by Whittle [302] in terms of expectations. Here probabilities appear as the expectations of statements, {0, 1}-valued random variables. von Plato [240] discusses the history of the concept of probability. Krüger et al. [169] discuss the history of probability in the various fields of application. Sklar [275] discusses the philosophical problems of the probability concept, with an emphasis on statistical mechanics.
Dirac talked about q-numbers versus c-numbers. Quantum observables are q-number variables that generally do not commute among themselves. He was proposing to have a generalized form of numbers as elements of a noncommutative algebra. That was Dirac's appreciation of the mathematical properties of the physical quantities as presented in Heisenberg's new quantum theory. After all, the familiar real, or complex, number system only came into existence through the history of mathematics. Values of physical quantities having a commutative product is an assumption that is not compatible with quantum physics. The revolutionary idea of Heisenberg and Dirac was pulled back to a much more conservative setting by the work of Schrödinger, followed by Born and Bohr. What Bohr missed is that the real number values we obtained from our measurements are only a consequence of the design of the kind of experiments and our using real numbers to calibrate the output scales of our apparatus. It is only our modeling of the information obtained about the physical quantities rather than what Nature dictates. We have proposed an explicit notion of definite noncommutative values of observables that gives a picture of quantum mechanics as realistic as the classical theory. In this article, we illustrate how matrices can be taken as noncommutative (q-)numbers serving as the values of physical quantities, each to be seen as a piece of quantum information. Our main task is to clarify the subtle issues involved in setting up a conventional scheme assigning matrices as values to the physical quantities.
Some interpretations of quantum mechanics try to describe the probabilistic nature of quantum measurements in a way that allows a system in a pure state to always have precise (if not simultaneously knowable) values for all its observable variables. In what might be called a simple ensemble interpretation, the quantum mechanical state vector is assumed to define a statistical ensemble of identically prepared systems, each of which has precise values for all its observable variables, and the act of measurement is equivalenced to a straightforward sampling of that ensemble. It is shown here, in a manner that should be suitable for a first course in quantum mechanics, that a simple ensemble interpretation is not possible for some quantum systems, and hence is untenable as a general premise. The analysis is essentially a repackaging of the Bell argument against hidden variables, although hidden variables are never invoked here.