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/0702171 · Journal of Physics Conference Series

Why quantum dynamics is linear

Thomas F Jordan

Published Nov 1, 2009• 16 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

A seed George planted 45 years ago is still producing fruit now. In 1961, George set out the fundamental proposition that quantum dynamics is described most generally by linear maps of density matrices. Since the first sprout from George's seed appeared in 1962, we have known that George's fundamental proposition can be used to derive the linear Schrodinger equation in cases where it can be expected to apply. Now we have a proof of George's proposition that density matrices are mapped linearly to density matrices, that there can be no nonlinear generalization of this. That completes the derivation of the linear Schrodinger equation. The proof of George's proposition replaces Wigner's theorem that a symmetry transformation is represented by a linear or antilinear operator. The assumption needed to prove George's proposition is just that the dynamics does not depend on anything outside the system but must allow the system to be described as part of a larger system. This replaces the physically less compelling assumption of Wigner's theorem that absolute values of inner products are preserved. The history of this question is reviewed. Nonlinear generalizations of quantum mechanics have been proposed. They predict small but clear nonlinear effects, which very accurate experiments have not seen. This begs the question. Is there a reason in principle why nonlinearity is not found? Is it impossible? Does quantum dynamics have to be linear? Attempts to prove this have not been decisive, because either their assumptions are not compelling or their arguments are not conclusive. The question has been left unsettled. The simple answer, based on a simple assumption, was found in two steps separated by 44 years.

DOI
10.1088/1742-6596/196/1/012010

Related papers

Why quantum dynamics is linear

Jordan, T F

Quantum dynamics is linear. How do we know? From theory or experiment? The history of this question is reviewed. Nonlinear generalizations of quantum mechanics have been proposed. They predict small but clear nonlinear effects, which very accurate experiments have not seen. Is there a reason in principle why nonlinearity is not found? Is it impossible? Does quantum dynamics have to be linear? Attempts to prove this have not been decisive, because either their assumptions are not compelling or their arguments are not conclusive. The question has been left unsettled. There is a simple answer, based on a simple assumption. It was found in two steps separated by 44 years. They are steps back to simpler and more compelling assumptions. A proof of the assumptions of the Wigner-Bargmann proof has been known since 1962. It assumes that the maps of density matrices in time are linear. For this step, it is also assumed that density matrices are mapped one-to-one onto density matrices. An alternative is to assume that pure states are mapped one-to-one onto pure states and that entropy does not decrease. In a step taken in 2006, it is proved that the maps of density matrices in time are linear. It is assumed, as in the earlier step, that at each time the physical quantities and states are described by the usual linear structures of quantum mechanics, so the question is only about how things change in time. Beyond that, the proof assumes only that the dynamics does not depend on anything outside the system, but must allow the system to be described as part of a larger system.

•Feb 16, 2007•11 citations

Assumptions that imply quantum dynamics is linear

Thomas F. Jordan

A basic linearity of quantum dynamics, that density matrices are mapped linearly to density matrices, is proven very simply for a system that does not interact with anything else. It is assumed that at each time the physical quantities and states are described by the usual linear structures of quantum mechanics. Beyond that, the proof assumes only that the dynamics does not depend on anything outside the system but must allow the system to be described as part of a larger system. The basic linearity is linked with previously established results to complete a simple derivation of the linear Schr\"odinger equation. For this it is assumed that density matrices are mapped one-to-one onto density matrices. An alternative is to assume that pure states are mapped one-to-one onto pure states and that entropy does not decrease.

arXiv:quant-ph/0508092•Physical Review A•Feb 2, 2006•41 citations

Assumptions implying the Schrödinger equation

Thomas F. Jordan

A program of proofs is outlined to show how the linear structure of quantum mechanics can be derived from basic principles. For the dynamics part, three alternatives are reviewed briefly. They include the Kadison theorem for evolution of density matrices and the Segal–Simon theorem for evolution of observables in the Heisenberg picture. The focus is on Wigner’s theorem that gives linear operators for evolution of state vectors. New insights are described that motivate the key assumption about probabilities in that theorem. One is that it is implied by the second law of thermodynamics. Another is that it follows from assumptions that evolution in time preserves mixtures of states and preserves probabilities for what is in the mixture.

American Journal of Physics•Jul 1, 1991•20 citations

Fundamental significance of tests that quantum dynamics is linear

Thomas F. Jordan

Experiments that look for nonlinear quantum dynamics test the fundamental premise of physics that one of two separate systems can influence the physical behavior of the other only if there is a force between them, an interaction that involves momentum and energy. The premise is tested because it is the assumption of a proof that quantum dynamics must be linear. Here, variations of a familiar example are used to show how results of nonlinear dynamics in one system can depend on correlations with the other. Effects of one system on the other, influence without interaction between separate systems, not previously considered possible, would be expected with nonlinear quantum dynamics. Whether it is possible or not is subject to experimental tests together with the linearity of quantum dynamics. Concluding comments and questions consider directions our thinking might take in response to this surprising unprecedented situation.

arXiv:1002.4673•Physical Review A•Sep 9, 2010•7 citations

Mapping the Schrödinger picture of open quantum dynamics

Thomas F. Jordan, Anil Shaji, E. C. G. Sudarshan

For systems described by finite matrices, an affine form is developed for the maps that describe evolution of density matrices for a quantum system that interacts with another. This is established directly from the Heisenberg picture. It separates elements that depend only on the dynamics from those that depend on the state of the two systems. While the equivalent linear map is generally not completely positive, the homogeneous part of the affine maps is, and is shown to be composed of multiplication operations that come simply from the Hamiltonian for the larger system. The inhomogeneous part is shown to be zero if and only if the map does not increase the trace of the square of any density matrix. Properties are worked out in detail for two-qubit examples.

arXiv:quant-ph/0505123•Physical Review A•Jan 18, 2006•20 citations

Dynamical Mappings of Density Operators in Quantum Mechanics. II. Time Dependent Mappings

Thomas F. Jordan, Mark A. Pinsky, E. C. G. Sudarshan

The most general continuous time-dependent evolution of a physical system is represented by a continuous one-parameter semi-group of linear mappings of density operators to density operators. It is shown that if these dynamical mappings form a group they can be represented by a group of unitary operators on the Hilbert space of state vectors. This proof does not assume that the absolute values of inner products of state vectors or ``transition probabilities'' are preserved but deduces this fact from the requirement that density operators are mapped linearly to density operators. An example is given of a continuous one-parameter semi-group of dynamical mappings which is not a group.

Journal of Mathematical Physics•Sep 1, 1962•24 citations
A seed George planted 45 years ago is still producing fruit now. In 1961, George set out the fundamental proposition that quantum dynamics is described most generally by linear maps of density matrices. Since the first sprout from George's seed appeared in 1962, we have known that George's fundamental proposition can be used to derive the linear Schrodinger equation in cases where it can be expected to apply. Now we have a proof of George's proposition that density matrices are mapped linearly to density matrices, that there can be no nonlinear generalization of this. That completes the derivation of the linear Schrodinger equation. The proof of George's proposition replaces Wigner's theorem that a symmetry transformation is represented by a linear or antilinear operator. The assumption needed to prove George's proposition is just that the dynamics does not depend on anything outside the system but must allow the system to be described as part of a larger system. This replaces the physically less compelling assumption of Wigner's theorem that absolute values of inner products are preserved. The history of this question is reviewed. Nonlinear generalizations of quantum mechanics have been proposed. They predict small but clear nonlinear effects, which very accurate experiments have not seen. This begs the question. Is there a reason in principle why nonlinearity is not found? Is it impossible? Does quantum dynamics have to be linear? Attempts to prove this have not been decisive, because either their assumptions are not compelling or their arguments are not conclusive. The question has been left unsettled. The simple answer, based on a simple assumption, was found in two steps separated by 44 years.
Quantum dynamics is linear. How do we know? From theory or experiment? The history of this question is reviewed. Nonlinear generalizations of quantum mechanics have been proposed. They predict small but clear nonlinear effects, which very accurate experiments have not seen. Is there a reason in principle why nonlinearity is not found? Is it impossible? Does quantum dynamics have to be linear? Attempts to prove this have not been decisive, because either their assumptions are not compelling or their arguments are not conclusive. The question has been left unsettled. There is a simple answer, based on a simple assumption. It was found in two steps separated by 44 years. They are steps back to simpler and more compelling assumptions. A proof of the assumptions of the Wigner-Bargmann proof has been known since 1962. It assumes that the maps of density matrices in time are linear. For this step, it is also assumed that density matrices are mapped one-to-one onto density matrices. An alternative is to assume that pure states are mapped one-to-one onto pure states and that entropy does not decrease. In a step taken in 2006, it is proved that the maps of density matrices in time are linear. It is assumed, as in the earlier step, that at each time the physical quantities and states are described by the usual linear structures of quantum mechanics, so the question is only about how things change in time. Beyond that, the proof assumes only that the dynamics does not depend on anything outside the system, but must allow the system to be described as part of a larger system.
A basic linearity of quantum dynamics, that density matrices are mapped linearly to density matrices, is proven very simply for a system that does not interact with anything else. It is assumed that at each time the physical quantities and states are described by the usual linear structures of quantum mechanics. Beyond that, the proof assumes only that the dynamics does not depend on anything outside the system but must allow the system to be described as part of a larger system. The basic linearity is linked with previously established results to complete a simple derivation of the linear Schr\"odinger equation. For this it is assumed that density matrices are mapped one-to-one onto density matrices. An alternative is to assume that pure states are mapped one-to-one onto pure states and that entropy does not decrease.
A program of proofs is outlined to show how the linear structure of quantum mechanics can be derived from basic principles. For the dynamics part, three alternatives are reviewed briefly. They include the Kadison theorem for evolution of density matrices and the Segal–Simon theorem for evolution of observables in the Heisenberg picture. The focus is on Wigner’s theorem that gives linear operators for evolution of state vectors. New insights are described that motivate the key assumption about probabilities in that theorem. One is that it is implied by the second law of thermodynamics. Another is that it follows from assumptions that evolution in time preserves mixtures of states and preserves probabilities for what is in the mixture.
Experiments that look for nonlinear quantum dynamics test the fundamental premise of physics that one of two separate systems can influence the physical behavior of the other only if there is a force between them, an interaction that involves momentum and energy. The premise is tested because it is the assumption of a proof that quantum dynamics must be linear. Here, variations of a familiar example are used to show how results of nonlinear dynamics in one system can depend on correlations with the other. Effects of one system on the other, influence without interaction between separate systems, not previously considered possible, would be expected with nonlinear quantum dynamics. Whether it is possible or not is subject to experimental tests together with the linearity of quantum dynamics. Concluding comments and questions consider directions our thinking might take in response to this surprising unprecedented situation.
For systems described by finite matrices, an affine form is developed for the maps that describe evolution of density matrices for a quantum system that interacts with another. This is established directly from the Heisenberg picture. It separates elements that depend only on the dynamics from those that depend on the state of the two systems. While the equivalent linear map is generally not completely positive, the homogeneous part of the affine maps is, and is shown to be composed of multiplication operations that come simply from the Hamiltonian for the larger system. The inhomogeneous part is shown to be zero if and only if the map does not increase the trace of the square of any density matrix. Properties are worked out in detail for two-qubit examples.
The most general continuous time-dependent evolution of a physical system is represented by a continuous one-parameter semi-group of linear mappings of density operators to density operators. It is shown that if these dynamical mappings form a group they can be represented by a group of unitary operators on the Hilbert space of state vectors. This proof does not assume that the absolute values of inner products of state vectors or ``transition probabilities'' are preserved but deduces this fact from the requirement that density operators are mapped linearly to density operators. An example is given of a continuous one-parameter semi-group of dynamical mappings which is not a group.