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

arXiv:quant-ph/0208049

Critique of "No-Signaling Condition and Quantum Dynamics"

George Svetlichny

Published Aug 7, 2002• 3 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

We comment on the article of Ch. Simon, V. Buzek and N. Gisin: ``No-Signaling Condition and Quantum Dynamics'', Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 170405, which argues that linearity of quantum mechanics follows from lack of superluminal signals and some usual hypotheses about measurements. We argue that such assumptions in the end are ineffective as an explanation of the linearity of quantum mechanics.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/0208049

Related papers

Comment on “No-Signaling Condition and Quantum Dynamics”

Pavel Bóna

This paper contains a criticism of the article: Ch. Simon, V. Buzek and N. Gisin: ``No-Signaling Condition and Quantum Dynamics'', Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 170405, containing a proposal of adoption into quantum mechanics (QM) a new basic axiom. This axiom was declared to imply linearity of time evolution in QM on the basis of kinematic assumptions only. It is shown why, under the considered conditions, the axiom called ``no-signaling condition'' is not effective.

arXiv:quant-ph/0201002•Physical Review Letters•May 21, 2003•5 citations

No-Signaling Condition and Quantum Dynamics

Christoph Simon, Vladimír Bužek, Nicolas Gisin

We show that the basic dynamical rules of quantum physics can be derived from its static properties and the condition that superluminal communication is forbidden. More precisely, the fact that the dynamics has to be described by linear completely positive maps on density matrices is derived from the following assumptions: (1) physical states are described by rays in a Hilbert space, (2) probabilities for measurement outcomes at any given time are calculated according to the usual trace rule, and (3) superluminal communication is excluded. This result also constrains possible nonlinear modifications of quantum physics.

arXiv:quant-ph/0102125•Physical Review Letters•Oct 8, 2001•126 citations

Inferring linear quantum dynamics without no-signaling

S. Gheorghiu-Svirschevski

It is shown that the no-signaling condition is not needed in order to argue a linear quantum dynamics from standard quantum statics and the usual interpretation of quantum measurement outcomes as probabilistic mixtures.

arXiv:quant-ph/0311042•Nov 7, 2003•1 citation

No-faster-than-light-signaling implies linear evolution. A re-derivation

Angelo Bassi, Kasra Hejazi

Abstract There is a growing interest, both from the theoretical as well as experimental side, to test the validity of the quantum superposition principle, and of theories which explicitly violate it by adding nonlinear terms to the Schrödinger equation. We review the original argument elaborated by Gisin (1989 Helv. Phys. Acta 62 363), which shows that the non-superluminal-signaling condition implies that the dynamics of the density matrix must be linear. This places very strong constraints on the permissible modifications of the Schrödinger equation, since they have to give rise, at the statistical level, to a linear evolution for the density matrix. The derivation is done in a heuristic way here and is appropriate for the students familiar with the textbook quantum mechanics and the language of density matrices.

arXiv:1411.1768•European Journal of Physics•Aug 4, 2015•40 citations

Comments on: ``Weinberg's Nonlinear Quantum Mechanics and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox'', by Joseph Polchinski

Bogdan Mielnik

Contrary to the opinion of J. Polchinski [Phys.Rev.Lett. {\bf 66}, 397-400 (1991)], the phenomenon of superluminal messages in nonlinear versions of quantum mechanics is not a specific difficulty in a class of theories formulated by S. Weinberg [Ann.Phys. (N.Y.), {\bf 194}, 336-386 (1989)]. It appears in all schemes which try to enlarge the orthodox class of observables, while conserving the traditional structure of the pure and mixed states.

arXiv:quant-ph/0012041•Dec 8, 2000•1 citation

The assumptions underlying the consistent-amplitude approach to quantum theory

Ariel Caticha

In this note I expand further on the main assumptions leading to the consistent-amplitude approach to quantum theory and I offer a reply to Jerry Finkelstein's recent comment (quant-ph/9809017) concerning my argument for the linearity of quantum mechanics (Phys. Rev. A57, 1572 (1998)).

arXiv:quant-ph/9809066•Sep 22, 1998•1 citation
We comment on the article of Ch. Simon, V. Buzek and N. Gisin: ``No-Signaling Condition and Quantum Dynamics'', Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 170405, which argues that linearity of quantum mechanics follows from lack of superluminal signals and some usual hypotheses about measurements. We argue that such assumptions in the end are ineffective as an explanation of the linearity of quantum mechanics.
We show that the basic dynamical rules of quantum physics can be derived from its static properties and the condition that superluminal communication is forbidden. More precisely, the fact that the dynamics has to be described by linear completely positive maps on density matrices is derived from the following assumptions: (1) physical states are described by rays in a Hilbert space, (2) probabilities for measurement outcomes at any given time are calculated according to the usual trace rule, and (3) superluminal communication is excluded. This result also constrains possible nonlinear modifications of quantum physics.
Abstract There is a growing interest, both from the theoretical as well as experimental side, to test the validity of the quantum superposition principle, and of theories which explicitly violate it by adding nonlinear terms to the Schrödinger equation. We review the original argument elaborated by Gisin (1989 Helv. Phys. Acta 62 363), which shows that the non-superluminal-signaling condition implies that the dynamics of the density matrix must be linear. This places very strong constraints on the permissible modifications of the Schrödinger equation, since they have to give rise, at the statistical level, to a linear evolution for the density matrix. The derivation is done in a heuristic way here and is appropriate for the students familiar with the textbook quantum mechanics and the language of density matrices.