On the Classical Limit of Quantum Mechanics

Contrary to the widespread belief, the problem of the emergence of classical mechanics from quantum mechanics is still open. In spite of many results of the standard approach, it is not yet clear how to explain within standard quantum mechanics the classical motion of macroscopic bodies. In this paper, we shall formulate the classical limit as a scaling limit in terms of an adimensional parameter ε. We shall take the first steps toward a comprehensive understanding of the classical limit, analyzing special cases of classical behavior in the framework of a precise formulation of quantum mechanics called Bohmian mechanics which contains in its own structure the possibility of describing real objects in an observer-independent way.     

Why quantum mechanics?

It is suggested that anoversight occurred in classical mechanics when time-derivatives of observables were treated on the same footing as the undifferentiated observables. Removal of this oversight points in the direction of quantum mechanics. Additional light is thrown on uncertainty relations and on quantum mechanics, as a possible form of a subtle statistical mechanics, by the formulation of aclassical uncertainty relation for a very simple model. The existence of universal motion,i.e., of zero-point energy, is lastly made plausible in terms of a gravitational constant which is time-dependent. By these three considerations an attempt is made to link classical and quantum mechanics together more firmly, thus giving a better understanding of the latter.Paper dedicated to David Bohm on the occasion of his 70th birthday.     

Randomness in Classical Mechanics and?Quantum Mechanics

The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics assumes the existence of the classical deterministic Newtonian world. We argue that in fact the Newton determinism in classical world does not hold and in the classical mechanics there is fundamental and irreducible randomness. The classical Newtonian trajectory does not have a direct physical meaning since arbitrary real numbers are not observable. There are classical uncertainty relations: Δq>0 and Δp>0, i.e. the uncertainty (errors of observation) in the determination of coordinate and momentum is always positive (non zero).     

2T Physics, Scale Invariance and Topological Vector Fields

We construct, in classical two-time physics, the necessary structure for the most general configuration space formulation of quantum mechanics containing gravity in d+2 dimensions. This structure is composed of a symmetric Riemannian metric tensor and of a vector field that defines a section of a flat U(1) bundle over space-time. This construction is possible because of the existence of a finite local scale invariance of the Hamiltonian and because two-time physics contains, at the classical level, a local generalization of the discrete duality symmetry between position and momentum that underlies the structure of quantum mechanics.     

Description of physical systems

A general “logical” scheme, containing both classical and quantum mechanics, is developed on the basis of plausible axioms. We introduce the division of states and yes-no measurements into sharp and diffuse ones, and prove that sharp states possess their carriers. Owing to this result, the existence of lattice joins and meets is proved for a wide class of elements of the logic. This “semi-lattice” structure gives the familiar lattice picture for special cases of classical and quantum mechanics. The notion of quantum superposition is introduced in this general scheme. It is proved that if in a theory appear nontrivial quantum superpositions, then this theory is “undeterministic” and vise versa. Further analysis of the pure state space leads to the construction of the canonical embedding of the general logic into an orthomodular complete ortho-lattice. After defining the probability of transition between pure states, the pure state space appears to be a generalization of Mielnik's “probability space” of quantum mechanics.     

A Continuous Transition Between Quantum and Classical Mechanics. I

In spite of its popularity, it has not been possible to vindicate the conventional wisdom that classical mechanics is a limiting case of quantum mechanics. The purpose of the present paper is to offer an alternative formulation of mechanics which provides a continuous transition between quantum and classical mechanics via environment-induced decoherence.     

Quantum Chaos and Dynamical Entropy

We review the notion of dynamical entropy by Connes, Narnhofer and Thirring and relate it to Quantum Chaos. A particle in a periodic potential is used as an example. This is worked out in the classical and the quantum mechanical framework, for the single particle as well as for the corresponding gas. The comparison does not only support the general assertion that quantum mechanics is qualitatively less chaotic than classical mechanics. More specifically, the same dynamical mechanism by which a periodic potential leads to a positive dynamical entropy of the classical particle may reduce the dynamical entropy of the quantum gas in comparison to free motion. Received: 26 June 1997 / Accepted: 13 April 1998     

Quantum Physics and Classical Physics—In the Light of Quantum Logic

In contrast to the Copenhagen interpretation we consider quantum mechanics as universally valid and query whether classical physics is really intuitive and plausible. We discuss these problems within the quantum logic approach to quantum mechanics where the classical ontology is relaxed by reducing metaphysical hypotheses. On the basis of this weak ontology a formal logic of quantum physics can be established which is given by an orthomodular lattice. By means of the Solèr condition and Piron's result one obtains the classical Hilbert spaces. However, this approach is not fully convincing. There is no plausible justification of Solèr's law and the quantum ontology is partly too weak and partly too strong. We propose to replace this ontology by an ontology of unsharp properties and conclude that quantum mechanics is more intuitive than classical mechanics and that classical mechanics is not the macroscopic limit of quantum mechanics.     

Wave Mechanics or Wave Statistical Mechanics

By comparison between equations of motion of geometrical optics and that of classical statistical mechanics, this paper finds that there should be an analogy between geometrical optics and classical statistical mechanics instead of geometrical mechanics and classical mechanics. Furthermore, by comparison between the classical limit of quantum mechanics and classical statistical mechanics, it finds that classical limit of quantum mechanics is classical statistical mechanics not classical mechanics, hence it demonstrates that quantum mechanics is a natural generalization of classical statistical mechanics instead of classical mechanics. Thence quantum mechanics in its true appearance is a wave statistical mechanics instead of a wave mechanics.     

Wave Mechanics or Wave Statistical Mechanics

By comparison between equations of motion of geometrical optics and that of classical statistical mechanics, this paper finds that there should be an analogy between geometrical optics and classical statistical mechanics instead of geometrical mechanics and classical mechanics. Furthermore, by comparison between the classical limit of quantum mechanics and classical statistical mechanics, it finds that classical limit of quantum mechanics is classical statistical mechanics not classical mechanics, hence it demonstrates that quantum mechanics is a natural generalization of classical statistical mechanics instead of classical mechanics. Thence quantum mechanics in its true appearance is a wave statistical mechanics instead of a wave mechanics.     

Quantization as Selection Problem

Quantum systems exhibit a smaller number of energetic states than classical systems (A. Einstein, 1907, Die Plancksche Theorie der Strahlung und die Theorie der spezifischen Wärme, Ann. Phys. 22, 180ff). We take up the selection criterion for this in two parts. (1) The selection problem between classical and nonclassical mechanical systems is formulated in terms of possible and impossible configurations (among others, this overcomes the difficulties occurring when discussing the behavior of quantum particles in terms of paths). (2) The (nonclassical) selection of the quantum states is formulated, using recurrence relations and the energy law. The reformulation of “quantization as eigenvalue problem” in terms of “quantization as selection problem” allows one to derive Schrödinger’s stationary equation from classical mechanics through a straightforward and unique procedure; the nonstationary and multibody equations are subsequently acquired within the same frame. In contrast to the (classical) eigenvalue problem, the (nonclassical) selection problem can be formulated and solved without any reference to additional a priori assumptions on the nature of the quantum system, such as the wave-corpuscle dualism or an underlying wave equation or the existence of Planck’s finite action parameter. The existence of such an additional parameter—as the only additional one—is inherent in the procedure. Within our axiomatic-deductive approach, we modify classical mechanics only where it itself indicates an inherent limitation.     

How Classical Particles Emerge From the Quantum World

The symmetrization postulates of quantum mechanics (symmetry for bosons, antisymmetry for fermions) are usually taken to entail that quantum particles of the same kind (e.g., electrons) are all in exactly the same state and therefore indistinguishable in the strongest possible sense. These symmetrization postulates possess a general validity that survives the classical limit, and the conclusion seems therefore unavoidable that even classical particles of the same kind must all be in the same state—in clear conflict with what we know about classical particles. In this article we analyze the origin of this paradox. We shall argue that in the classical limit classical particles emerge, as new entities that do not correspond to the “particle indices” defined in quantum mechanics. Put differently, we show that the quantum mechanical symmetrization postulates do not pertain to particles, as we know them from classical physics, but rather to indices that have a merely formal significance. This conclusion raises the question of whether many discussions in the literature about the status of identical quantum particles have not been misguided.     

Probability density in the complex plane

The correspondence principle asserts that quantum mechanics resembles classical mechanics in the high-quantum-number limit. In the past few years, many papers have been published on the extension of both quantum mechanics and classical mechanics into the complex domain. However, the question of whether complex quantum mechanics resembles complex classical mechanics at high energy has not yet been studied. This paper introduces the concept of a local quantum probability density ρ(z) in the complex plane. It is shown that there exist infinitely many complex contours C of infinite length on which ρ(z) dz is real and positive. Furthermore, the probability integral is finite. Demonstrating the existence of such contours is the essential element in establishing the correspondence between complex quantum and classical mechanics. The mathematics needed to analyze these contours is subtle and involves the use of asymptotics beyond all orders.     

Classical Mechanics Without Determinism

Classical statistical particle mechanics in the configuration space can be represented by a nonlinear Schrödinger equation. Even without assuming the existence of deterministic particle trajectories, the resulting quantum-like statistical interpretation is sufficient to predict all measurable results of classical mechanics. In the classical case, the wave function that satisfies a linear equation is positive, which is the main source of the fundamental difference between classical and quantum mechanics.     

Logical foundation of quantum mechanics

The subject of this article is the reconstruction of quantum mechanics on the basis of a formal language of quantum mechanical propositions. During recent years, research in the foundations of the language of science has given rise to adialogic semantics that is adequate in the case of a formal language for quantum physics. The system ofsequential logic which is comprised by the language is more general than classical logic; it includes the classical system as a special case. Although the system of sequential logic can be founded without reference to the empirical content of quantum physical propositions, it establishes an essential part of the structure of the mathematical formalism used in quantum mechanics. It is the purpose of this paper to demonstrate the connection between the formal language of quantum physics and its representation by mathematical structures in a self-contained way.     

An Axiomatization for Quantum Processes to Unifying Quantum and Classical Computing

We establish an axiomatization for quantum processes, which is a quantum generalization of process algebra ACP (Algebra of Communicating Processes). We use the framework of a quantum process configuration 〈p, ϱ〉, but we treat it as two relative independent part: the structural part p and the quantum part ϱ, because the establishment of a sound and complete theory is dependent on the structural properties of the structural part p. We let the quantum part ϱ be the outcomes of execution of p to examine and observe the function of the basic theory of quantum mechanics. We establish not only a strong bisimilarity for quantum processes, but also a weak bisimilarity to model the silent step and abstract internal computations in quantum processes. The relationship between quantum bisimilarity and classical bisimilarity is established, which makes an axiomatization of quantum processes possible. An axiomatization for quantum processes called qACP is designed, which involves not only quantum information, but also classical information and unifies quantum computing and classical computing. qACP can be used easily and widely for verification of most quantum communication protocols.

     

de Broglie-Bohm formulation of quantum mechanics, quantum chaos and breaking of time-reversal invariance

A recently developed unified theory of classical and quantum chaos, based on the de Broglie-Bohm (Hamilton-Jacobi) formulation of quantum mechanics is presented and its consequences are discussed. The quantum dynamics is rigorously defined to be chaotic if the Lyapunov number, associated with the quantum trajectories in de Broglie-Bohm phase space, is positive definite. This definition of quantum chaos which under classical conditions goes over to the well-known definition of classical chaos in terms of positivity of Lyapunov numbers, provides a rigorous unified definition of chaos on the same footing for both the dynamics. A demonstration of the existence of positive Lyapunov numbers in a simple quantum system is given analytically, proving the existence of quantum chaos. Breaking of the time-reversal symmetry in the corresponding quantum dynamics under chaotic evolution is demonstrated. It is shown that the rigorous deterministic quantum chaos provides an intrinsic mechanism towards irreversibility of the Schrodinger evolution of the wave function, without invoking ‘wave function collapse’ or ‘measurements’     

From Wave-Particle to Features-Event Complementarity

The terms wave and particle are of classical origin and are inadequate in dealing with the novelties of quantum mechanics with respect to classical physics. In this paper we propose to substitute the wave-particle terminology with that of features-event complementarity. This approach aims at solving some of the problems affecting quantum-mechanics since its birth. In our terminology, features are what is responsible for one of the most characterizing aspects of quantum mechanics: quantum correlations. We suggest that an (uninterpreted) basic ontology for quantum mechanics should be thought of as constituted by events, features and their dynamical interplay, and that its (interpreted) theoretical ontology (made up by three classes of theoretical entities: states, observables and properties) does not isomorphically correspond to the uninterpreted ontology. Operations, i.e. concrete interventions within the physical world, like preparation, premeasurement and measurement, together with reliable inferences, assure the bridge between interpreted and uninterpreted ontology.