Advertisement

Representations of Quantum Logics and Transition Probability Spaces

  • Sylvia Pulmannova
Part of the Fundamental Theories of Physics book series (FTPH, volume 24)

Abstract

Two axiomatic approaches to quantum mechanics are compared : the quantum-logic approach and the transition-probabi1ity spaces approach. It is shown that the quantum-logic approach is more general than the transition-probability spaces approach. Necessary and sufficient conditions -for the equivalence of these approaches are found. As a generalization of the above approaches, a notion of an orthogonality space is introduced. Conditions under which an orthogonality space can be represented in a generalized Hilbert space are investigated.

Keywords

Probability Space Characteristic Subset Quantum Logic Division Ring Hermitian Form 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Birkhoff G 1967 Lattice Theory Providence Rhode IslandzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Birkhoff, G. vonNeumann, J. 1936 The logic of quantum mechanics. Annals of mathematics 37 823-843CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gudder, S. (1970) ‚Projective representations of quantum logics′ Int. J. Theor. Phvs. 3 99-108CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gudder, S. Pulmannova, S. 1987 Transition amplitude spaces J. Math. Phvs. 28 376-385Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hedlikova, J., Pulmannova, S.:‚ Orthogonality spaces and atomic ortho- complemented lattices.′ In preparation.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mackey, G. 1963 The mathematical -Foundations of quantum mechanics Benjamin New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mac Laren, D. 1964 Atomic orthocomplemented lattices Pac. J. Math 14 597-612Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Maczyrniski, M. 1973 The orthogonality postulate in axiomatic quantum mechanics Int. J. Theor. Phys. 8 353-360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Maczyrniski, M. 1974 Functional properties of quantum logics Int. J. Theor. Phys. 11 149-156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Maeda, F., Maeda S. 1970 Theory of symmetric lattices Springer BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mczyrniski, M. 1974 Functional properties of quantum logics Int. J. Theor. Phys. 11 149-156CrossRefzbMATHADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mielnik B 1969 Theory of filters Commun. Math. Phys. 15 1-46CrossRefzbMATHADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    von Neumann, J. (1981) ′Continuous geometries with a transition proba-bility.′ Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 34, No 252.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Piron, C. 1976 Foundations of quantum physics Benjamin Reading Mass.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pulmannova, S. 1986 Transition probability spaces J. Math. Phys. 27 1791-1795CrossRefADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pulmannova, S. ′Functional properties of transition probability spaces.′ Rep. Math. Phys., to appearGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mielnik B 1969 Theory of filters Commun. Math, Phys. 28 2393-2399CrossRefzbMATHADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Varadarajan, V. 1968 Geometry of quantum theory Van Nostrand Princeton New JerseyzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sylvia Pulmannova
    • 1
  1. 1.Mathematics InstituteSlovak Academy of SciencesBratislavaCzechoslovakia

Personalised recommendations