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/9906108

States, Symmetries and Superselection

Domenico Giulini

Published Jun 28, 1999• 3 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The process of dynamical decoherence may cause apparent superselection rules, which are sometimes called `environmentally induced' or `soft'. A natural question is whether such dynamical processes are eventually also responsible for at least some of the superselection rules which are usually presented as fundamentally rooted in the kinematical structure of the theory (so called `hard' superselection rules). With this question in mind, I re-investigate two well known examples where superselection rules are usually argued to rigorously exist within the given mathematical framework. These are (1) the Bargmann superselection rule for the total mass in Galilei invariant quantum mechanics and (2) the charge superselection rule in quantum electrodynamics. I argue that, for various reasons, the kinematical arguments usually given are not physically convincing unless they are based on an underlying dynamical process.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/9906108

Related papers

On Galilei invariance in quantum mechanics and the Bargmann superselection rule

Giulini, D

We reinvestigate Bargmann's superselection rule for the overall mass of n particles in ordinary quantum mechanics with Galilei invariant interaction potential. We point out that in order for mass to define a superselection rule it should be considered as a dynamical variable. We present a minimal extension of the original dynamics in which mass it treated as dynamical variable. Here the classical symmetry group turns out to be given by an \\reals-extension of the Galilei group which formerly appeared only at the quantum level. There is now no obstruction to implement an action of the classical symmetry group on Hilbert space. We include some critical comments of a general nature on formal derivations of superselection rules without dynamical context.

•Aug 2, 1995•29 citations

The philosophical problems of implementing superselection rules

Jorge Manero

Some physicists believe that superselection rules should be implemented to get rid of inconsistencies when a theory is framed in terms of a new mathematical formulation, whilst others think that this new formulation should be modified instead of implementing those rules, at the expense of introducing additional mathematical structure. The outcome, however, is that we are still uncertain whether these rules should be implemented and how they should be interpreted and assessed from the philosophical point of view. Based on a detailed examination of the group-theoretic reformulation of (relativistic and non-relativistic) quantum mechanics that prompts physicists to impose superselection rules, I shall argue that the implementation of these rules involves serious heuristic and epistemological concerns. Considering this argument, I shall conclude that there are suitable philosophical reasons to claim that the implementation of superselection rules should be rejected and that there are certain circumstances when the formulation of a theory should be modified.

arXiv:2310.03014•Oct 4, 2023•0 citations

Symmetries, superselection rules, and decoherence

Giulini, D, Claus Kiefer, Zeh, H D

We discuss the applicability of the programme of decoherence -- emergence of approximate classical behaviour through interaction with the environment -- to cases where it was suggested that the presence of symmetries would lead to exact superselection rules. For this discussion it is useful to make a distinction between pure symmetries and redundancies, which results from an investigation into the constraint equations of the corresponding theories. We discuss, in particular, superpositions of states with different charges, as well as with different masses, and suggest how the corresponding interference terms although they exist in principle, become inaccessible through decoherence.

•Oct 21, 1994•43 citations

On Galilei Invariance in Quantum Mechanics and the Bargmann Superselection Rule

Domenico Giulini

arXiv:quant-ph/9508002•Annals of Physics•Jul 1, 1996•44 citations

Puzzling out the mass-superselection rule

Magdalena Zych, Daniel M. Greenberger

Mass-superselection rule (MSR) states that in the non-relativistic quantum theory superpositions of states with different masses are unphysical. While MSR features even in textbooks, its validity, physical content and consequences remain debated. Its original derivation is known to be inconsistent, while a consistent approach does not yield a superselection rule. Yet, superpositions of masses do not seem to be present in Newtonian physics. Here we offer a resolution of the MSR puzzle. Crucial for the result is the understanding of two issues: how the notion of a mass parameter arises from the fundamentally dynamical relativistic notion of mass-energy, and what is the correct Newtonian limit of relativistic dynamics of composite particles. The result explains the physical content of the MSR without invoking any non-standard physics and clarifies the relation between MSR and a formalism describing relativistic composite particles, developed for studying relativistic effects in table top experiments.

arXiv:1906.03725•Jun 9, 2019•0 citations

Decoherence and the Appearance of a Classical World in Quantum Theory

Robert Alicki

In the last decade decoherence has become a very popular topic mainly due to the progress in experimental techniques which allow monitoring of the process of decoherence for single microscopic or mesoscopic systems. The other motivation is the rapid development of quantum information and quantum computation theory where decoherence is the main obstacle in the implementation of bold theoretical ideas. All that makes the second improved and extended edition of this book very timely. Despite the enormous efforts of many authors decoherence with its consequences still remains a rather controversial subject. It touches on, namely, the notoriously confusing issues of quantum measurement theory and interpretation of quantum mechanics. The existence of different points of view is reflected by the structure and content of the book. The first three authors (Joos, Zeh and Kiefer) accept the standard formalism of quantum mechanics but seem to reject orthodox Copenhagen interpretation, Giulini and Kupsch stick to both while Stamatescu discusses models which go beyond the standard quantum theory. Fortunately, most of the presented results are independent of the interpretation and the mathematical formalism is common for the (meta)physically different approaches. After a short introduction by Joos followed by a more detailed review of the basic concepts by Zeh, chapter 3 (the longest chapter) by Joos is devoted to the environmental decoherence. Here the author considers mostly rather `down to earth' and well-motivated mechanisms of decoherence through collisions with atoms or molecules and the processes of emission, absorption and scattering of photons. The issues of decoherence induced superselection rules and localization of objects including the possible explanation of the molecular structure are discussed in details. Many other topics are also reviewed in this chapter, e.g., the so-called Zeno effect, relationships between quantum chaos and decoherence, the role of decoherence in quantum information processing and even decoherence in the brain. The next chapter, written by Kiefer, is devoted to decoherence in quantum field theory and quantum gravity which is a much more speculative and less explored topic. Two complementary aspects are studied in this approach: decoherence of particle states by the quantum fields and decoherence of field states by the particles. Cosmological issues related to decoherence are discussed, not only within the standard Friedmann cosmology, but also using the elements of the theory of black holes, wormholes and strings. The relations between the formalism of consistent histories defined in terms of decoherence functionals and the environmental decoherence are discussed in chapter 5, also written by Kiefer. The Feynman--Vernon influence functional for the quantum open system is presented in detail as the first example of decoherence functional. Then the general theory is outlined together with possible interpretations including cosmological aspects. The next chapter by Giulini presents an overview of the superselection rules arising from physical symmetries and gauge transformations both for nonrelativistic quantum mechanics and quantum field theory. Critical discussion of kinematical superselection rules versus dynamical ones is illustrated by numerous examples like Galilei invariant quantum mechanics, quantum electrodynamics and quantum gravity. The introduction to the theory of quantum open systems and its applications to decoherence models is given in chapter 7 by Kupsch. Generalized master equations, Markovian approximation and a few Hamiltonian models relevant for decoherence are discussed. Some mathematical tools, e.g., complete positivity and entropy inequalities are also presented. The last chapter by Stamatescu is devoted to stochastic collapse models which can be interpreted either as certain representations of the dynamics of open quantum systems or as fundamental modifications of the Schr\"odinger equation. The final part of the book consists of remarks by Zeh on related concepts and methods and seven appendices. The broad spectrum, mathematically-friendly presentation, inclusion of the very recent developments and the extensive bibliography (about 550 references) make this book a valuable reference for all researchers, graduate and PhD students interested in the foundations of quantum mechanics, quantum open systems and quantum information. The relative independence of the chapters and numerous redundancies allow for selective reading, which is very helpful for newcomers to this field.

Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General•Jan 19, 2004•64 citations
The process of dynamical decoherence may cause apparent superselection rules, which are sometimes called environmentally induced' or soft'. A natural question is whether such dynamical processes are eventually also responsible for at least some of the superselection rules which are usually presented as fundamentally rooted in the kinematical structure of the theory (so called `hard' superselection rules). With this question in mind, I re-investigate two well known examples where superselection rules are usually argued to rigorously exist within the given mathematical framework. These are (1) the Bargmann superselection rule for the total mass in Galilei invariant quantum mechanics and (2) the charge superselection rule in quantum electrodynamics. I argue that, for various reasons, the kinematical arguments usually given are not physically convincing unless they are based on an underlying dynamical process.
We reinvestigate Bargmann's superselection rule for the overall mass of n particles in ordinary quantum mechanics with Galilei invariant interaction potential. We point out that in order for mass to define a superselection rule it should be considered as a dynamical variable. We present a minimal extension of the original dynamics in which mass it treated as dynamical variable. Here the classical symmetry group turns out to be given by an \\reals-extension of the Galilei group which formerly appeared only at the quantum level. There is now no obstruction to implement an action of the classical symmetry group on Hilbert space. We include some critical comments of a general nature on formal derivations of superselection rules without dynamical context.
Some physicists believe that superselection rules should be implemented to get rid of inconsistencies when a theory is framed in terms of a new mathematical formulation, whilst others think that this new formulation should be modified instead of implementing those rules, at the expense of introducing additional mathematical structure. The outcome, however, is that we are still uncertain whether these rules should be implemented and how they should be interpreted and assessed from the philosophical point of view. Based on a detailed examination of the group-theoretic reformulation of (relativistic and non-relativistic) quantum mechanics that prompts physicists to impose superselection rules, I shall argue that the implementation of these rules involves serious heuristic and epistemological concerns. Considering this argument, I shall conclude that there are suitable philosophical reasons to claim that the implementation of superselection rules should be rejected and that there are certain circumstances when the formulation of a theory should be modified.
We discuss the applicability of the programme of decoherence -- emergence of approximate classical behaviour through interaction with the environment -- to cases where it was suggested that the presence of symmetries would lead to exact superselection rules. For this discussion it is useful to make a distinction between pure symmetries and redundancies, which results from an investigation into the constraint equations of the corresponding theories. We discuss, in particular, superpositions of states with different charges, as well as with different masses, and suggest how the corresponding interference terms although they exist in principle, become inaccessible through decoherence.
Mass-superselection rule (MSR) states that in the non-relativistic quantum theory superpositions of states with different masses are unphysical. While MSR features even in textbooks, its validity, physical content and consequences remain debated. Its original derivation is known to be inconsistent, while a consistent approach does not yield a superselection rule. Yet, superpositions of masses do not seem to be present in Newtonian physics. Here we offer a resolution of the MSR puzzle. Crucial for the result is the understanding of two issues: how the notion of a mass parameter arises from the fundamentally dynamical relativistic notion of mass-energy, and what is the correct Newtonian limit of relativistic dynamics of composite particles. The result explains the physical content of the MSR without invoking any non-standard physics and clarifies the relation between MSR and a formalism describing relativistic composite particles, developed for studying relativistic effects in table top experiments.
In the last decade decoherence has become a very popular topic mainly due to the progress in experimental techniques which allow monitoring of the process of decoherence for single microscopic or mesoscopic systems. The other motivation is the rapid development of quantum information and quantum computation theory where decoherence is the main obstacle in the implementation of bold theoretical ideas. All that makes the second improved and extended edition of this book very timely. Despite the enormous efforts of many authors decoherence with its consequences still remains a rather controversial subject. It touches on, namely, the notoriously confusing issues of quantum measurement theory and interpretation of quantum mechanics. The existence of different points of view is reflected by the structure and content of the book. The first three authors (Joos, Zeh and Kiefer) accept the standard formalism of quantum mechanics but seem to reject orthodox Copenhagen interpretation, Giulini and Kupsch stick to both while Stamatescu discusses models which go beyond the standard quantum theory. Fortunately, most of the presented results are independent of the interpretation and the mathematical formalism is common for the (meta)physically different approaches. After a short introduction by Joos followed by a more detailed review of the basic concepts by Zeh, chapter 3 (the longest chapter) by Joos is devoted to the environmental decoherence. Here the author considers mostly rather `down to earth' and well-motivated mechanisms of decoherence through collisions with atoms or molecules and the processes of emission, absorption and scattering of photons. The issues of decoherence induced superselection rules and localization of objects including the possible explanation of the molecular structure are discussed in details. Many other topics are also reviewed in this chapter, e.g., the so-called Zeno effect, relationships between quantum chaos and decoherence, the role of decoherence in quantum information processing and even decoherence in the brain. The next chapter, written by Kiefer, is devoted to decoherence in quantum field theory and quantum gravity which is a much more speculative and less explored topic. Two complementary aspects are studied in this approach: decoherence of particle states by the quantum fields and decoherence of field states by the particles. Cosmological issues related to decoherence are discussed, not only within the standard Friedmann cosmology, but also using the elements of the theory of black holes, wormholes and strings. The relations between the formalism of consistent histories defined in terms of decoherence functionals and the environmental decoherence are discussed in chapter 5, also written by Kiefer. The Feynman--Vernon influence functional for the quantum open system is presented in detail as the first example of decoherence functional. Then the general theory is outlined together with possible interpretations including cosmological aspects. The next chapter by Giulini presents an overview of the superselection rules arising from physical symmetries and gauge transformations both for nonrelativistic quantum mechanics and quantum field theory. Critical discussion of kinematical superselection rules versus dynamical ones is illustrated by numerous examples like Galilei invariant quantum mechanics, quantum electrodynamics and quantum gravity. The introduction to the theory of quantum open systems and its applications to decoherence models is given in chapter 7 by Kupsch. Generalized master equations, Markovian approximation and a few Hamiltonian models relevant for decoherence are discussed. Some mathematical tools, e.g., complete positivity and entropy inequalities are also presented. The last chapter by Stamatescu is devoted to stochastic collapse models which can be interpreted either as certain representations of the dynamics of open quantum systems or as fundamental modifications of the Schr\"odinger equation. The final part of the book consists of remarks by Zeh on related concepts and methods and seven appendices. The broad spectrum, mathematically-friendly presentation, inclusion of the very recent developments and the extensive bibliography (about 550 references) make this book a valuable reference for all researchers, graduate and PhD students interested in the foundations of quantum mechanics, quantum open systems and quantum information. The relative independence of the chapters and numerous redundancies allow for selective reading, which is very helpful for newcomers to this field.