The interpretation of quantum mechanics has been discussed since this theme first was brought up by Einstein and Bohr. This article describes a proposal for a new foundation of quantum theory, partly drawing upon ideas from statistical inference theory. The approach can be said to have an intuitive basis: The quantum states of a physical system are under certain conditions in one-to-one correspondence with the following: 1. Focus on a concrete question to nature and then 2. Give a definite answer to this question. This foundation implies an epistemic interpretation, depending upon the observer, but the objective world is restored when all observers agree on their observations on some variables. The article contains a survey of parts of the authors books on epistemic processes, which give more details about the theory. At the same time, the article extends some of the discussion in the books, and at places makes it more precise.
We derive essential elements of quantum mechanics from a parametric structure extending that of traditional mathematical statistics. The basic setting is a set
A of incompatible experiments, and a transformation group G on the cartesian product Π of the parameter spaces of these experiments. The set of possible parameters is constrained to lie in a subspace of Π, an orbit or a set of orbits of G. Each possible model is then connected to a parametric Hilbert space. The spaces of different experiments are linked unitarily, thus defining a common Hilbert space H. A state is equivalent to a question together with an answer: the choice of an experiment
a∈A plus a value for the corresponding parameter. Finally, probabilities are introduced through Born’s formula, which is derived from a recent version of Gleason’s theorem. This then leads to the usual formalism of elementary quantum mechanics in important special cases. The theory is illustrated by the example of a quantum particle with spin.
The general view is that all fundamental physical laws should be formulated within the framework given by quantum mechanics (QM). In a sense, QM therefore has the character of a metaphysical theory. Consequently, if it is possible to derive QM from more basic principles, these principles should be of general, philosophical nature. Here, we derive the formalism of QM from well-motivated epistemic principles. A key assumption is that a physical theory that relies on entities or distinctions that are unknowable in principle gives rise to wrong predictions. First, an epistemic formalism is developed, using concepts like knowledge and potential knowledge, identifying a physical state
S with the potential knowledge of the physical world. It is demonstrated that QM emerges from this formalism. However, Hilbert spaces, wave functions and probabilities are defined in certain well-defined observational contexts only. This means that the epistemic formalism is broader than QM. In the fundamental layer of description, the physical state
S is a subset of a state space
S={Z}, such that
S always contains many elements
Z. These elements correspond to unattainable states of complete knowledge of the world. The evolution of
S cannot be determined in terms of the individual evolution of the elements
Z, unlike the evolution of an ensemble in classical phase space. The evolution of
S is described in terms of sequential time
n∈N, which is updated according to
n→n+1 each time an event occurs, each time potential knowledge changes. Sequential time
n can be separated from relational time
t, which describes distances between events in space-time. There is an entire space-time associated with each
n, in which
t represents the knowledge at sequential time
n about the temporal relations between present and past events.
Taking several statistical examples, in particular one involving a choice of experiment, as points of departure, and making symmetry assumptions, the link towards quantum theory developed in Helland (2005a,b) is surveyed and clarified. The quantum Hilbert space is constructed from the parameters of the various experiments using group representation theory. It is shown under natural assumptions that a subset of the set of unit vectors of this space, the generalized coherent state vectors, can be put in correspondence with questions of the kind: What is the value of the (complete) parameter? - together with a crisp answer to that question. Links are made to statistical models in general, to model reduction of overparametrized models and to the design of experiments. It turns out to be essential that the range of the statistical parameter is an invariant set under the relevant symmetry group.
A version of quantum theory is derived from a set of plausible assumptions related to the following general setting: For a given system there is a set of experiments that can be performed, and for each such experiment an ordinary statistical model is defined. The parameters of the single experiments are functions of a hyperparameter, which defines the state of the system. There is a symmetry group acting on the hyperparameters, and for the induced action on the parameters of the single experiment a simple consistency property is assumed, called permissibility of the parametric function. The other assumptions needed are rather weak. The derivation relies partly on quantum logic, partly on a group representation of the hyperparameter group, where the invariant spaces are shown to be in 1-1 correspondence with the equivalence classes of permissible parametric functions. Planck's constant only plays a role connected to generators of unitary group representations.
Every experiment or observational study is made in a context. This context is being explicitly considered in this book. To do so, a conceptual variable is defined as any variable which can be defined by (a group of) researchers in a given setting. Such variables are classified. Sufficiency and ancillarity are defined conditionally on the context. The conditionality principle, the sufficiency principle and the likelihood principle are generalized, and a tentative rule for when one should not condition on an ancillary is motivated by examples. The theory is illustrated by the case where a nuisance parameter is a part of the context, and for this case, model reduction is motivated. Model reduction is discussed in general from the point of view that there exists a mathematical group acting upon the parameter space. It is shown that a natural extension of this discussion also gives a conceptual basis from which essential parts of the formalism of quantum mechanics can be derived. This implies an epistemological basis for quantum theory, a kind of basis that has also been advocated by part of the quantum foundation community in recent years. Born's celebrated formula is shown to follow from a focused version of the likelihood principle together with some reasonable assumptions on rationality connected to experimental evidence. Some statistical consequences of Born's formula are sketched. The questions around Bell's inequality are approached by using the conditionality principle for each observer. The objective aspects of the world are identified with the ideal inference results upon which all observers agree (epistemological objectivity).