# The Nature of Information in Quantum Mechanics

- 94 Downloads
- 3 Citations

## Abstract

A suitable unified statistical formulation of quantum and classical mechanics in a *-algebraic setting leads us to conclude that information itself is noncommutative in quantum mechanics. Specifically we refer here to an observer's information regarding a physical system. This is seen as the main difference from classical mechanics, where an observer's information regarding a physical system obeys classical probability theory. Quantum mechanics is then viewed purely as a mathematical framework for the probabilistic description of noncommutative information, with the projection postulate being a noncommutative generalization of conditional probability. This view clarifies many problems surrounding the interpretation of quantum mechanics, particularly problems relating to the measuring process.

## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## REFERENCES

- 1.W. Heisenberg,
*The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory*(University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1930).Google Scholar - 2.J. Bub, “Von Neumann's projection postulate as a probability conditionalization rule in quantum mechanics,”
*J. Phil. Logic***6**, 381–390 (1977).Google Scholar - 3.C. A. Fuchs, “Quantum foundations in the light of quantum information,” in
*Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Decoherence and Its Implications in Quantum Computation and Information Transfer*, A. Gonis, ed. (Plenum, New York, 2001); quant-ph/0106166, quant-ph/0205039.Google Scholar - 4.C. M. Caves, C. A. Fuchs, and R. Schack, “Quantum probabilities as Bayesian probabilities,”
*Phys. Rev. A***65**, 022305 (2002).Google Scholar - 5.O. Bratteli and D. W. Robinson,
*Operator Algebras and Quantum Statistical Mechanics 1*, 2nd edn. (Springer, New York, 1987).Google Scholar - 6.G. J. Murphy,
*C*-Algebras and Operator Theory*(Academic, San Diego, 1990).Google Scholar - 7.W. Rudin,
*Real and Complex Analysis*, 3rd edn. (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1987).Google Scholar - 8.B. O. Koopman, “Hamiltonian systems and transformations in Hilbert space,”
*Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.***17**, 315–318 (1931).Google Scholar - 9.M. Born,
*Physics in My Generation*(Pergamon, London, 1956).Google Scholar - 10.D. Petz, “Conditional expectation in quantum probability,” in
*Quantum Probability and Applications III*, L. Accardi and W. von Waldenfels, eds. (Springer, Berlin, 1988), pp. 251–260.Google Scholar - 11.R. Duvenhage, “Recurrence in quantum mechanics,”
*Int. J. Theor. Phys.***41**, 45–61 (2002).Google Scholar - 12.C. A. Fuchs and A. Peres, “Quantum theory needs no ‘interpretation’,”
*Phys. Today***53**(3), 70–71 (2000).Google Scholar - 13.S. Straătilaă and L. Zsido´,
*Lectures on von Neumann algebras*(Editura Academiei, Bucures¸ti and Abacus Press, Tunbridge Wells, 1979).Google Scholar - 14.R. Haag,
*Local Quantum Physics: Fields, Particles, Algebras*, 2nd edn. (Springer, Berlin, 1996).Google Scholar - 15.J. Schwinger,
*Quantum Mechanics: Symbolism of Atomic Measurements*(Springer, Berlin, 2001).Google Scholar - 16.J. von Neumann,
*Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik*(Springer, Berlin, 1932); English transl.*Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics*by R. T. Beyer (Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1955).Google Scholar - 17.T. Sudbery, “Continuous state reduction,” in
*Quantum Concepts in Space and Time*, R. Penrose and C. J. Isham, eds. (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1986), pp. 65–83.Google Scholar - 18.A. S. Holevo, “Limit theorems for repeated measurements and continuous measurement processes,” in
*Quantum Probability and Applications IV*, L. Accardi and W. von Waldenfels, eds. (Springer, Berlin, 1989), pp. 229–255.Google Scholar - 19.B. Misra and E. C. G. Sudarshan, “The Zeno's paradox in quantum theory,”
*J. Math. Phys.***18**, 756–763 (1977).Google Scholar - 20.C. Cohen-Tannoudji, B. Diu, and F. Laloe¨,
*Quantum mechanics*, Volume I (Hermann, Paris, and Wiley, New York, 1977).Google Scholar - 21.A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, “Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?,”
*Phys. Rev.***47**, 777–780 (1935).Google Scholar - 22.C. J. Isham,
*Lectures on Quantum Theory: Mathematical and Structural Foundations*(Imperial College Press, London, 1995).Google Scholar - 23.
- 24.S. Doplicher, K. Fredenhagen, and J. E. Roberts, “The quantum structure of spacetime at the Planck scale and quantum fields,”
*Commun. Math. Phys.***172**, 187–220 (1995).Google Scholar - 25.J. Marsden,
*Application of Global Analysis in Mathematical Physics*(Carleton Mathematical Lecture Notes, No. 3, 1973).Google Scholar - 26.D. R. Finkelstein,
*Quantum Relativity: A Synthesis of the Ideas of Einstein and Heisenberg*(Springer, Berlin, 1996).Google Scholar - 27.R. F. Streater, “Classical and quantum probability,”
*J. Math. Phys.***41**, 3556–3603 (2000).Google Scholar