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/0310101 · Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics

On information-theoretic characterizations of physical theories

Hans Halvorson

Published Apr 28, 2004• 18 citations
arXivHTMLPDF
DOI
10.1016/j.shpsb.2004.02.001

Related papers

Information Theoretic Characterization of Physical Theories with Projective State Space

Marco Zaopo

Foundations of Physics•May 18, 2015•0 citations

Characterizing Quantum Theory in Terms of Information-Theoretic Constraints

Rob Clifton, Jeffrey Bub, Hans Halvorson

arXiv:quant-ph/0211089•Foundations of Physics•Oct 24, 2003•369 citations

Can quantum theory be characterized in information-theoretic terms?

Chris Heunen, Aleks Kissinger

Does information play a significant role in the foundations of physics? We investigate whether information-theoretic constraints characterize quantum theory. In a C*-algebraic framework, this is known to hold via three equivalences: no broadcasting and noncommutativity; no bit commitment and nonlocality; no signalling and kinematic independence. But this complex linear framework could be said to build in quantum theory from the start. We show that the first two equivalences break, and the third holds, in a framework of generalized, possibly nonlinear, C*-algebras. This uncovers a hierarchy of notions of when (quantum) information is classical.

•Apr 20, 2016•2 citations

Information-Theoretic Postulates for Quantum Theory

Markus P. Müller, Lluís Masanes

arXiv:1203.4516•Fundamental theories of physics•Dec 9, 2015•23 citations

Why the quantum

Jeffrey Bub

This paper is a commentary on the foundational significance of the Clifton-Bub-Halvorson theorem characterizing quantum theory in terms of three information-theoretic constraints (Foundations of Physics 33, 1561-1591 (2003); quant-ph/0211089). I argue that: (1) a quantum theory is best understood as a theory about the possibilities and impossibilities of information transfer, as opposed to a theory about the mechanics of nonclassical waves or particles, (2) given the information-theoretic constraints, any mechanical theory of quantum phenomena that includes an account of the measuring instruments that reveal these phenomena must be empirically equivalent to a quantum theory, and (3) assuming the information-theoretic constraints are in fact satisfied in our world, no mechanical theory of quantum phenomena that includes an account of measurement interactions can be acceptable, and the appropriate aim of physics at the fundamental level then becomes the representation and manipulation of information.

•Feb 20, 2004•7 citations

Why the quantum?

Jeffrey Bub

This paper is a commentary on the foundational significance of the Clifton-Bub-Halvorson theorem characterizing quantum theory in terms of three information-theoretic constraints (Foundations of Physics 33, 1561-1591 (2003); quant-ph/0211089). I argue that: (1) a quantum theory is best understood as a theory about the possibilities and impossibilities of information transfer, as opposed to a theory about the mechanics of nonclassical waves or particles, (2) given the information-theoretic constraints, any mechanical theory of quantum phenomena that includes an account of the measuring instruments that reveal these phenomena must be empirically equivalent to a quantum theory, and (3) assuming the information-theoretic constraints are in fact satisfied in our world, no mechanical theory of quantum phenomena that includes an account of measurement interactions can be acceptable, and the appropriate aim of physics at the fundamental level then becomes the representation and manipulation of information.

arXiv:quant-ph/0402149•Feb 20, 2004•0 citations
Does information play a significant role in the foundations of physics? We investigate whether information-theoretic constraints characterize quantum theory. In a C*-algebraic framework, this is known to hold via three equivalences: no broadcasting and noncommutativity; no bit commitment and nonlocality; no signalling and kinematic independence. But this complex linear framework could be said to build in quantum theory from the start. We show that the first two equivalences break, and the third holds, in a framework of generalized, possibly nonlinear, C*-algebras. This uncovers a hierarchy of notions of when (quantum) information is classical.
This paper is a commentary on the foundational significance of the Clifton-Bub-Halvorson theorem characterizing quantum theory in terms of three information-theoretic constraints (Foundations of Physics 33, 1561-1591 (2003); quant-ph/0211089). I argue that: (1) a quantum theory is best understood as a theory about the possibilities and impossibilities of information transfer, as opposed to a theory about the mechanics of nonclassical waves or particles, (2) given the information-theoretic constraints, any mechanical theory of quantum phenomena that includes an account of the measuring instruments that reveal these phenomena must be empirically equivalent to a quantum theory, and (3) assuming the information-theoretic constraints are in fact satisfied in our world, no mechanical theory of quantum phenomena that includes an account of measurement interactions can be acceptable, and the appropriate aim of physics at the fundamental level then becomes the representation and manipulation of information.
This paper is a commentary on the foundational significance of the Clifton-Bub-Halvorson theorem characterizing quantum theory in terms of three information-theoretic constraints (Foundations of Physics 33, 1561-1591 (2003); quant-ph/0211089). I argue that: (1) a quantum theory is best understood as a theory about the possibilities and impossibilities of information transfer, as opposed to a theory about the mechanics of nonclassical waves or particles, (2) given the information-theoretic constraints, any mechanical theory of quantum phenomena that includes an account of the measuring instruments that reveal these phenomena must be empirically equivalent to a quantum theory, and (3) assuming the information-theoretic constraints are in fact satisfied in our world, no mechanical theory of quantum phenomena that includes an account of measurement interactions can be acceptable, and the appropriate aim of physics at the fundamental level then becomes the representation and manipulation of information.