arXiv:quant-ph/9603005 · Reviews in Mathematical Physics

Poisson Spaces with a Transition Probability

Nicolaas P. Landsman

Published Jan 1, 1997• 14 citations

Abstract

The common structure of the space of pure states ℘ of a classical or a quantum mechanical system is that of a Poisson space with a transition probability. This is a topological space equipped with a Poisson structure, as well as with a function p:℘×℘→[0,1], with certain properties. The Poisson structure is connected with the transition probabilities through unitarity (in a specific formulation intrinsic to the given context). In classical mechanics, where p(ρ,σ)=δρσ, unitarity poses no restriction on the Poisson structure. Quantum mechanics is characterized by a specific (complex Hilbert space) form of p, and by the property that the irreducible components of ℘ as a transition probability space coincide with the symplectic leaves of ℘ as a Poisson space. In conjunction, these stipulations determine the Poisson structure of quantum mechanics up to a multiplicative constant (identified with Planck's constant). Motivated by E. M. Alfsen, H. Hanche-Olsen and F. W. Shultz (Acta Math.144 (1980) 267–305) and F.W. Shultz (Commun. Math. Phys.82 (1982) 497–509), we give axioms guaranteeing that ℘ is the space of pure states of a unital C*-algebra. We give an explicit construction of this algebra from ℘.

DOI: 10.1142/s0129055x97000038

Related papers

Poisson geometric formulation of quantum mechanics

Pritish Sinha, Ankit Yadav

We study the Poisson geometrical formulation of quantum mechanics for finite dimensional mixed and pure states. Equivalently, we show that quantum mechanics can be understood in the language of classical mechanics. We review the symplectic structure of the Hilbert space and identify its canonical coordinates. We extend the geometric picture to the space of density matrices DN+. We find it is not symplectic but admits a linear su(N) Poisson structure. We identify Casimir surfaces of DN+ and show that the space of pure states PN≡CPN−1 is one of its symplectic submanifolds which is an intersection of primitive Casimirs. We identify generic symplectic submanifolds of DN+ and calculate their dimensions. We find that DN+ is singularly foliated by the symplectic leaves of varying dimensions, also known as coadjoint orbits. We also find an ascending chain of Poisson submanifolds DNM⊂DNM+1 for 1 ≤ M ≤ N − 1. Each such Poisson submanifold DNM is obtained by tracing out the CM states from the bipartite system CN×CM and is an intersection of N − M primitive Casimirs of DN+. Their Poisson structure is induced from the symplectic structure of the bipartite system. We also show their foliations. Finally, we study the positive semi-definite geometry of the symplectic submanifold ENM consisting of the mixed states with maximum entropy in DNM.

arXiv:2312.05615Journal of Mathematical PhysicsJun 1, 20240 citations

Geometric Formulation of Berezin Quantization

Rasoul Rokhnizadeh, H. D. Doebner

In this paper we try to formulate the Berezin quantization on projective Hilbert space P(H) and use its geometric structure. It will be shown that the star product in Berezin quantiza- tion is equivalent to the Poisson bracket on P(H) and the Berezin method to construction a correspondence between a given classical theory and a given quantum theory is used to define a classical limit for geometric quantum mechanics. the covariant symbols. These symbols are expectation values of the observables in terms of coherent states: the holomorphic functions on classical phase space M that is assumed to be aKmanifold. Berezin (2) showed that the covariant symbols form a ∗-algebra which in limit � → 0l eads to the Poisson algebra between the corresponding classical observables: The functions on the phase space M. In this paper we will see that the Berezin ∗-algebra is in fact a Poisson algebra which is induced by the Fubini-Study 2-form on space of coherent states. This space is defined as follows: coherent states span a dense subspace H of Hilbert space H. P( H), which is denoted by M, is aKmanifold with induced symplectic structure from P(H). Therefore the covariant symbols can be considered as functions on M. It is shown (13) that there exists an embedding mapping between the classical phase space M and M, by which to any point z ∈ M is associated ap ointZ ∈M. With this construction to all of the quantum observables are associated their covariant symbols, which form a Poisson algebra on M and since the corresponding classical observables form a Poisson algebra on M , the Berezin quantization is a systematic procedure to relate these two Poisson algebras. Also the relation of Berezin quantization and geometric for- mulation of quantum mechanics will be evident as follows. The geometric quantum mechanics is a formulation of quantum mechanics in projective Hilbert spaces. With our construction one sees that the Berezin quantization is an equivalent formulation and in addition gives a prescription as classical limit for geometric quantum mechanics (9).

Presented atJan 1, 20010 citations

Probability in quantum mechanics

J. V. Corbett

Quantum mechanics is usually described in the terminology of probability theory even though the properties of the probability spaces associated with it are fundamentally different from the standard ones of probability theory. For example, Kolmogorov's axioms are not general enough to encompass the non-commutative situations that arise in quantum theory. There have been many attempts to generalise these axioms to meet the needs of quantum mechanics. The focus of these attempts has been the observation, first made by Birkhoff and von Neumann (1936), that the propositions associated with a quantum-mechanical system do not form a Boolean σ-algebra. There is almost universal agreement that the probability space associated with a quantum-mechanical system is given by the set of subspaces of a separable Hilbert space, but there is disagreement over the algebraic structure that this set represents. In the most popular model for the probability space of quantum mechanics the propositions are assumed to form an orthocomplemented lattice (Mackey (1963), Jauch (1968)). The fundamental concept here is that of a partial order, that is a binary relation that is reflexive and transitive but not symmetric. The partial order is interpreted as embodying the logical concept of implication in the set of propositions associated with the physical system. Although this model provides an acceptable mathematical expression of the probabilistic structure of quantum mechanics in that the subspaces of a separable Hilbert space give a representation of an ortho-complemented lattice, it has several deficiencies which will be discussed later.

Advances in Applied ProbabilityDec 1, 19781 citation

CLASSICAL BEHAVIOR IN QUANTUM MECHANICS: A TRANSITION PROBABILITY APPROACH

Nicolaas P. Landsman

A formalism is developed for describing approximate classical behavior in finite (but possibly large) quantum systems. This is done in terms of a structure common to classical and quantum mechanics, viz. a Poisson space with a transition probability. Both the limit where ħ→0 in a fixed finite system and the limit where the size of the system goes to infinity are incorporated. In either case, classical behavior is seen only for certain observables and in a restricted class of states.

arXiv:quant-ph/9511001International Journal of Modern Physics BJun 30, 199612 citations

Geometric Hamiltonian formulation of quantum mechanics in complex projective spaces

Davide Pastorello

In finite dimension (at least), Quantum Mechanics can be formulated as a proper Hamiltonian theory where a notion of phase space is given by the projective space P(H) constructed on the Hilbert space H of the considered quantum theory. It is well-known P(H) can be equipped with a structure of Kähler manifold, in particular we have a symplectic form and a Poisson structure; Quantum dynamics can be described in terms of a Hamiltonian vector field on P(H). In this paper, exploiting the notion and properties of so-called frame functions, I describe a general prescription for associating quantum observables to real functions on P(H), classical-like observables, and quantum states to probability densities on P(H), Liouville densities, in order to obtain a complete and meaningful Hamiltonian formulation of a finite-dimensional quantum theory.

International Journal of Geometric Methods in Modern PhysicsJun 12, 20158 citations

Independence and Lévy Processes in Quantum Probability

Uwe Franz, Adam Skalski

Introduction Quantum probability is a generalization of both classical probability theory and quantum mechanics that allows to describe the probabilistic aspects of quantum mechanics. This generalization is formulated in two steps. First, the theory is reformulated in terms of algebras of functions on probability spaces. Therefore, the notion of a probability space (Ω, ℱ , P ) is replaced by the pair ( L ∞ (Ω), E (.) = ∫ Ω . d P ) consisting of the commutative von Neumann algebra of bounded random variables and the expectation functional. Then, the commutativity condition is dropped. In this way we arrive at the notion of a (von Neumann) algebraic probability space ( N ,Φ) consisting of a von Neumann algebra N and a normal (faithful tracial) state Φ. As we have seen this includes classical probability spaces in the form ( L ∞ (Ω), E ), it also includes quantum mechanical systems modeled by a Hilbert space H and a pure state ψ ∊ H (or a mixed state ρ ∊ S ( H )), if we take N = B ( H ) and Ф the state defined by Ф( X ) = 〈 ψ, X ψ 〉 (or Ф ( X ) = tr(ρ X )) for X ∊ B ( H ). Note that in this course we shall relax the conditions on N and Φ and work with involutive algebras and positive normalized functionals, that is, *-algebraic probability spaces. A striking feature of quantum probability (also called noncommutative probability) is the existence of several notions of independence. This is the starting point of this course, which intends to give an introduction to the theory of quantum stochastic processes with independent increments. However, before we come to these processes, we will give a general introduction to quantum probability. In Section 1.2, we recall the basic definitions of quantum probability and discuss some fundamental differences between classical probability and quantum probability. In Section 1.3 we address the question ‘Why do we need Quantum Probability?’ We discuss the EPR experiment and the Kochen–Specker Theorem, which show that we cannot model quantum physics with classical probability spaces because the values of observable quantities do not exist unless we specify which measurement we will carry out and which quantities we will determine. In this sense quantum physics requires a more radical description of chance.

Cambridge University Press eBooksDec 18, 20151 citation