Anthropomorphic Quantum Darwinism as an Explanation for Classicality
According to Zurek, the emergence of a classical world from a quantum substrate could result from a long selection process that privileges the classical bases according to a principle of optimal information. We investigate the consequences of this principle in a simple case, when the system and the environment are two interacting scalar particles supposedly in a pure state. We show that then the classical regime corresponds to a situation for which the entanglement between the particles (the system and the environment) disappears. We describe in which circumstances this factorisability condition is fulfilled, in the case that the particles interact via position-dependent potentials, and also describe in appendix the tools necessary for understanding our results (entanglement, Bell inequalities and so on).
KeywordsQuantum Darwinism Environment induced superselection Entanglement
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Bell J. S. (1965) On the EPR paradox. Physics 1: 195–200Google Scholar
- Bell J. S. (1987) Speakable and unspeakable in quantum mechanics. University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Braun, D. (2005). Entanglement from thermal black body radiation (pp. 1–10), quant-ph/0505082.Google Scholar
- Broadbent, A., & Methot, A. A. (2005). Entanglement swapping, light cones and elements of reality (pp. 1–9), quant-ph/0511047.Google Scholar
- Dürr, D., Goldstein, S., Tumulka, R., & Zanghi, N. (2005). To appear in the encyclopedia of philosophy, 2nd edn [edited by D. M. Borchert (Macmillan Reference, (www.math.rutgers.edu/~oldstein/papers/bbt.pdf))].
- Durt, T. (2000). Localization of quantum systems and special relativity. In Proceedings of the conference, physical interpretations of relativity theory (p. 89). London, September 2000.Google Scholar
- Durt, T. (2001). Characterization of an entanglement-free evolution (PP. 1–21). quant-ph/0109112.Google Scholar
- Durt, T. (2004a). Quoted in the New Scientist, March 2004, in the paper “Quantum Entanglement, How the Future can influence the past”, by Michael Brooks, about entanglement and interaction in Quantum Mechanics.Google Scholar
- Durt T. (2004) Quantum entanglement, interaction, and the classical limit. Zeit fur Naturf 59A: 425–436Google Scholar
- Durt, T. (2006). Quantum information, entanglement and relationships. Cosmos, 2(1), 21–48 (World Scientific Singapore).Google Scholar
- Durt T. (2007) Quantum information, a survey. Physicalia Magazine 29(4): 145–160Google Scholar
- Ehrenfest, P. (1917). In what way does it become manifest in the fundamental laws of physics that space has three dimensions. In Proceedings of Amsterdam academy, Vol. 20, (p. 200–209).Google Scholar
- Faris, W. (1996). Notices of the AMs, November , 1339 (http://www.ams.org/notices/199611/faris.pdf).
- Janssen, H. (2008). Reconstructing Reality Environment-induced decoherence, the measurement problem, and the emergence of definiteness in quantum mechanics. Master Thesis, Univ. Nijmegen, http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00004224/01/scriptie.pdf. A critical assessment
- Kaslikowski D., Kwek L. C., Englert B.-G., Zukowski M. (2003) Information theoretic approach to single-particle and two-particle interference in multi-path interferometers. Physics Review Letters 91: 037901 (4 pages)Google Scholar
- Masanes, L., Acin, A., & Gisin, N. (2005). General properties of nonsignaling theories (pp. 1–10), quant-ph/0508016.Google Scholar
- Masanes, L., Acin, A., & Gisin, N. (2010). From Bell’s theorem to secure quantum key distribution (pp. 1–5), quant-ph/0510094.Google Scholar
- Nielsen M. A., Chuang I. L. (2000) Quantum computing and quantum information. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Omnès R. (1994) The interpretation of quantum mechanics. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
- Schrödinger, E. (1935). Discussion of probability relations between separated systems. In Proceedings of Cambridge Philosophy Society, Vol. 31 (p. 555–563). The english translation can also be found in Wheeler and Zurek (1983).Google Scholar
- Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379–423 (623–656), http://plan9.belllabs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf.
- Squires E. (1994) The mystery of the quantum world (2nd ed.). Taylor and Francis, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Tittel, W., Brendel, J., Zbinden, H., & Gisin, N. (2000). Experimental test of relativistic quantum state collapse with moving reference frames (pp. 1–4), quant-ph/0002031.Google Scholar
- Wheeler, J.A., Zurek, W.H. (eds) (1983) Quantum theory and measurement. Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
- Wiseman H.M., Eisert J. (2007) Nontrivial quantum effects in biology: A skeptical point of view. In: Abbott D. (eds) Invited contribution to Quantum aspects of life. World Scientific, Singapore, pp 381–402Google Scholar
- Zurek, W. H. (2003). Decoherence and the transition from quantum to classical revisited, http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0306072.