Contradictions or Curiosities? On Kent's Critique of the Masanes--Galley--Müller Derivation of the Quantum Measurement Postulates

Blake C. Stacey

2024-05-28

Abstract:Adrian Kent has recently criticized Masanes, Galley and Müller's work on postulates for quantum mechanics. MGM claim to find two contradictions in Kent's criticism. I argue that neither is a true contradiction unless some other premise is added.

Quantum Physics

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Response to "The measurement postulates of quantum mechanics are not redundant"

Lluís Masanes,Thomas D. Galley,Markus P. Müller

2024-06-24

Abstract:Adrian Kent has recently presented a critique [<a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="2307.06191" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.06191">arXiv:2307.06191</a>] of our paper [Nat. Comms. 10, 1361 (2019)] in which he claims to refute our main result: the measurement postulates of quantum mechanics can be derived from the rest of postulates, once we assume that the set of mixed states of a finite-dimensional Hilbert space is finite-dimensional. To construct his argument, Kent considers theories resulting from supplementing quantum mechanics with hypothetical "post-quantum" measurement devices. We prove that each of these theories contains pure states (i.e. states of maximal knowledge) which are not rays of the Hilbert space, in contradiction with the "pure state postulate" of quantum mechanics. We also prove that these alternatives violate the finite-dimensionality of mixed states. Each of these two facts separately invalidates the refutation. In this note we also clarify the assumptions used in [Nat. Comms. 10, 1361 (2019)] and discuss the notions of pure state, physical system, and the sensitivity of the structure of the state space under modifications of the measurements or the dynamics.

Quantum Physics
Reply to `No Contradictions between Bohmian and quantum mechanics'

Partha Ghose

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/0008007

2000-08-01

Quantum Physics

Abstract:Marchildon's claim (quant-ph/0007068) regarding Ghose's papers (quant-ph/0001024 and 0003037) is shown to be erroneous.
Modality, Potentiality and Contradiction in Quantum Mechanics

Christian de Ronde

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1502.05081

2015-02-18

Abstract:In [11], Newton da Costa together with the author of this paper argued in favor of the possibility to consider quantum superpositions in terms of a paraconsistent approach. We claimed that, even though most interpretations of quantum mechanics (QM) attempt to escape contradictions, there are many hints that indicate it could be worth while to engage in a research of this kind. Recently, Arenhart and Krause [1, 2, 3] have raised several arguments against this approach and claimed that, taking into account the square of opposition, quantum superpositions are better understood in terms of contrariety propositions rather than contradictory propositions. In [17] we defended the Paraconsistent Approach to Quantum Superpositions (PAQS) and provided arguments in favor of its development. In the present paper we attempt to analyze the meanings of modality, potentiality and contradiction in QM, and provide further arguments of why the PAQS is better suited, than the Contrariety Approach to Quantum Superpositions (CAQS) proposed by Arenhart and Krause, to face the interpretational questions that quantum technology is forcing us to consider.

Quantum Physics
Peaceful Coexistence: Examining Kent's Relativistic Solution to the Quantum Measurement Problem

Jeremy Butterfield

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1710.07844

2017-10-22

Abstract:Can there be `peaceful coexistence' between quantum theory and special relativity? Thirty years ago, Shimony hoped that isolating the culprit (i.e. the false assumption) in proofs of Bell inequalities as Outcome Independence would secure such peaceful coexistence: or, if not secure it, at least show a way---maybe the best or only way---to secure it. In this paper, I begin by being sceptical of Shimony's approach, urging that we need a relativistic solution to the quantum measurement problem (Section 2). Then I analyse Outcome Independence in Kent's realist one-world Lorentz-invariant interpretation of quantum theory (Sections 3 and 4). Then I consider Shimony's other condition, Parameter Independence, both in Kent's proposal and more generally, in the light of recent remarkable theorems by Colbeck, Renner and Leegwater (Section 5). For both Outcome Independence and Parameter Independence, there is a striking analogy with the situation in pilot-wave theory. Finally, I will suggest that these recent theorems make some kind of peaceful coexistence mandatory for someone who, like Shimony, endorses Parameter Independence.

Quantum Physics,History and Philosophy of Physics
Comment on ``Consistent Sets Yield Contrary Inferences in Quantum Theory''

Robert B. Griffiths,James B. Hartle

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.1981

1997-10-03

Abstract:In a recent paper Kent has pointed out that in consistent histories quantum theory it is possible, given initial and final states, to construct two different consistent families of histories, in each of which there is a proposition that can be inferred with probability one, and such that the projectors representing these two propositions are mutually orthogonal. In this note we stress that, according to the rules of consistent history reasoning two such propositions are not contrary in the usual logical sense namely, that one can infer that if one is true then the other is false, and both could be false. No single consistent family contains both propositions, together with the initial and final states, and hence the propositions cannot be logically compared. Consistent histories quantum theory is logically consistent, consistent with experiment as far as is known, consistent with the usual quantum predictions for measurements, and applicable to the most general physical systems. It may not be the only theory with these properties, but in our opinion, it is the most promising among present possibilities.

General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology,High Energy Physics - Theory,Quantum Physics
Non-locality and quasiclassical reality in Kent's formulation of relativistic quantum theory

Jeremy Butterfield,Brendan Marsh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1275/1/012002

2019-02-05

Abstract:We report Adrian Kent's proposed framework for a realist, one-world, Lorentz-invariant formulation of quantum theory. The idea is to postulate a final boundary condition: in effect, a late-time distribution of mass-energy recording how photons scattered off macroscopic objects. Nature selects this final boundary condition with the orthodox late-time Born probability; and this defines the probability space of events, to give a realist quantum theory. We emphasize two topics. First, we consider this formulation's verdicts about traditional locality conditions, such as Outcome Independence and Parameter Independence. Second, we discuss a possible amendment to Kent's proposal that, roughly speaking, allows for the emergence of a quasiclassical history even when mass-energy is shielded or delayed from appearing in the final boundary condition.

History and Philosophy of Physics
Comments on Struyve and Baere's paper on experiments to distinguish Bohmian mechanics from quantum mechanics

Partha Ghose

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/0208192

2002-08-30

Abstract:It is shown in detail why the arguments put forward by Struyve and Baere (<a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="quant-ph/0108038" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0108038">quant-ph/0108038</a>) against my conclusions are incorrect.

Quantum Physics
On the strangeness of quantum mechanics

Marcello Poletti

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-022-00582-w

2022-06-06

Abstract:The extravagances of quantum mechanics never fail to enrich daily the debate around natural philosophy. Entanglement, non-locality, collapse, many worlds, many minds, and subjectivism have challenged generations of thinkers. Its approach can perhaps be placed in the stream of quantum logic, in which the "strangeness" of quantum mechanics is "measured" through the violation of Bell's inequalities and, from there, attempts an interpretative path that preserves realism yet ends up overturning it, restating the fundamental mechanisms of QM as a logical necessity for a strong realism.

History and Philosophy of Physics,Quantum Physics
Discussion: Time-Symmetric Quantum Counterfactuals

Lev Vaidman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1401.6281

2014-01-24

Abstract:There is a trend to consider counterfactuals as invariably time-asymmetric. Recently, this trend manifested itself in the controversy about validity of counterfactual application of a time-symmetric quantum probability rule. Kastner (2003) analyzed this controversy and concluded that there are time-symmetric quantum counterfactuals which are consistent, but they turn out to be trivial. I correct Kastner's misquotation of my defense of time-symmetric quantum counterfactuals and explain their non-trivial aspects, thus contesting the claim that counterfactuals have to be time-asymmetric.

Quantum Physics
The Many Inconsistencies of the Purity-Mixture Distinction in Standard Quantum Mechanics

Christian de Ronde,César Massri

2024-10-31

Abstract:The distinction between pure states and mixed states is a kernel ingredient of what is considered to be the standard formulation of quantum mechanics and plays today a kernel role in foundational debates about the meaning of quantum probability, the separability of quantum systems, the definition and measure of entanglement, etc. In this work we attempt to expose the many inconsistencies introduced by this distinction and the serious consequences this has for many ongoing research programs within quantum physics which apply these notions uncritically.

History and Philosophy of Physics,Quantum Physics
The Frauchiger-Renner Gedanken Experiment: Flaws in Its Analysis -- How Logic Works in Quantum Mechanics

Stuart Samuel

2023-09-19

Abstract:In a publication (Nature Comm. 3711, 9 (2018)), Daniela Frauchiger and Renato Renner used a Wigner/friend gedanken experiment to argue that quantum mechanics cannot describe complex systems involving measuring agents. They were able to produce a contradictory statement starting with four statements about measurements performed on an entangled spin system. These statements needed to be combined using the transitive property of logic: If A implies B and B implies C, then A implies C. However, in combining successive statements for the Frauchiger-Renner gedanken experiment we show that quantum mechanics does not obey transitivity and that this invalidates their analysis. We also demonstrate that certain pairs of premises among the four statements are logically incompatible, meaning that the statements cannot all be used at once. In addition, to produce the contradiction, Frauchiger and Renner choose a particular run, which they call the `OK' -- `OKbar' one. However, the restriction to this case invalidates three of the four statements. Hence, there are three separate problems with logic in the 2018 Nature Communication publication. We also demonstrate the violation of the rules of logic -- including transitivity -- in certain situations in quantum mechanics in general. We use the Frauchiger-Renner gedanken experiment as a laboratory to explore a number of topics in quantum mechanics including wavefunction logic, Wigner/friend experiments, and the deduction of mathematical statements from knowledge of a wavefunction and obtain a number of interesting results. We show that Wigner/friend experiments of the type used by Frauchiger and Renner are impossible if the Wigner measurements are performed on macroscopic objects. They are possible on certain microscopic entities but then the Wigner measurements are rendered "ordinary" in which case ...

Quantum Physics
Weak versus deterministic macroscopic realism, and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen's elements of reality

Jesse Fulton,M. Thenabadu,Run Yan Teh,M. D. Reid

2023-08-25

Abstract:Violation of Leggett-Garg inequalities allows proof of the incompatibility between quantum mechanics and the combined premises (called macrorealism) of macroscopic realism (MR) and non-invasive measurability (NIM). Arguments can be given that the incompatibility arises because MR fails $-$ or else, that NIM fails. In this paper, we consider a strong failure of macrorealism, involving superpositions of coherent states, where the NIM premise is replaced by Bell-locality. We follow recent work and propose validity of a subset of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) and Leggett-Garg premises, referred to as \emph{weak macroscopic realism} (wMR). In finding consistency with wMR, we identify that the Leggett-Garg inequalities are violated because of failure of both MR and NIM, but also that both are valid in a less restrictive sense. Weak MR is distinguished from \emph{deterministic macroscopic realism} (dMR) by recognizing that a measurement involves a reversible unitary interaction that establishes the measurement setting. Weak MR posits a predetermined value for the measurement outcome, for the system defined at the time after the interaction, when the measurement setting is experimentally specified. An extended definition of wMR considers the element of reality defined by EPR for a system A, where one can predict with certainty the outcome of a measurement on A, by measurement on a system B. Weak MR posits that the element of reality exists once the unitary interaction determining the setting at B has occurred. We show compatibility of systems violating Leggett-Garg inequalities with wMR, but point out that dMR is falsifiable. We compare with other MR models, and give an argument for wMR on the basis that wMR resolves inconsistencies pointed out by Leggett and Garg between failure of macrorealism and assumptions intrinsic to quantum measurement theory.

Quantum Physics
Notes on the Conway-Kochen Twin Argument

Stephen L. Adler

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/0604122

2006-10-17

Abstract:This is a revision of my original posting, in which I raised objections to part of the Conway-Kochen argument. I now agree with them that their recent reply answers my original concerns. In the first part of these notes (identical to the original), I give a reformulation of the part of the Conway-Kochen result that closes the contextuality loophole in the original Kochen-Specker (KS) theorem. In the second part (modified in this revision) I review my concerns connected with the finite time needed to make a measurement, and briefly indicate how Conway and Kochen have reponded to them.

Quantum Physics
Weak Measurements and Counterfactual Computation

Onur Hosten,Paul G. Kwiat

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/0612159

2006-12-19

Quantum Physics

Abstract:Vaidman, in a recent article adopts the method of 'quantum weak measurements in pre- and postselected ensembles' to ascertain whether or not the chained-Zeno counterfactual computation scheme proposed by Hosten et al. is counterfactual; which has been the topic of a debate on the definition of counterfactuality. We disagree with his conclusion, which brings up some interesting aspects of quantum weak measurements and some concerns about the way they are interpreted.
Against (unitary) interpretation (of quantum mechanics): removing the metaphysical load

Marek Żukowski,Marcin Markiewicz

2024-09-26

Abstract:Physics is a science. Thus a statement can be treated as its "law" only if it agrees with our experience of the World/Nature (this includes our experiments). Statements which are fundamentally untestable are hypotheses which belong to metaphysics. Such are all interpretations of quantum mechanics, which attribute to its mathematical tools meanings that are beyond experimentally observable events, while not affecting quantum predictions of these events. We show that "unitary quantum mechanics", which according to its followers leads to some interesting paradoxes, is an interpretation of quantum mechanics, based on hypotheses that are untestable. The (operational) quantum mechanics, which is the one tested in every quantum experiment is free of these paradoxes. The root of "unitary" vs. operational discrepancy is that the latter treats the measurement process as irreversible, and in the different answers to the question of what is described by the state vector. The clearest manifestation of this is the insistence of the supporters of "unitary quantum mechanics" that measurements can be "in principle undone". "Unitarists" also try to avoid the postmeasurement state vector collapse at any cost, including no attempt to describe it, but still accept the Born rule as a calculational tool. Ipso facto, the hypothesis of "in principle possibility of undoing measurements" belongs to metaphysics, as it is untestable. In the case of predictions of factual events in the laboratories the ``unitary" quantum mechanics agrees with the operational one. It shares this property with all interpretations of quantum mechanics which do not affect its predictions. Metaphysics begins when one requests that quantum mechanics should be more than a mathematically formulated theory which predicts future observable events of a certain class basing on events observed earlier (of the same class).

Quantum Physics
Remarks on Consistent Histories and Bohmian Mechanics

Adrian Kent

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/9511032

1997-03-22

Abstract:Recent work with Dowker on the scientific status of the consistent histories approach to quantum theory is reviewed and summarised. The approach is compared with formulations of quantum theory, such as Bohmian mechanics and the Copenhagen interpretation a la Landau-Lifshitz, in which classical variables are explicitly appended. I try to explain why the consistent histories formulation is scientifically problematic, in that it is a very weak theory, but also scientifically interesting, shedding new light on quantum theory.

Quantum Physics
Logical Inconsistencies in Proofs of the Theorem of Bell

Karl Hess,Walter Philipp

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/0206046

2002-06-08

Abstract:We discuss a class of proofs of Bell-type inequalities that are based on tables of potential outcomes. These proofs state in essence: if one can only imagine (or write down in a table) the potential outcome of a hidden parameter model for EPR experiments then a contradiction to experiment and quantum mechanics follows. We show that these proofs do not contain hidden variables that relate to time or, if they do, lead to logical contradictions that render them invalid.

Quantum Physics
Contra multos verbos: On scandals of quantum mechanics

Theodorus Maria Nieuwenhuizen

2023-07-21

Abstract:In 2008 Nico van Kampen wrote in his letter {\it The scandal of quantum mechanics}: ``The scandal is that there are still many articles, discussions and textbooks, which advertise various interpretations and philosophical profundities." Not much has changed since then, while social media have given a platform for more of what Nico would term ``a scandal''. A detailed viewpoint is presented on the status of quantum mechanics, distilled from two decades of work with Armen Allahverdyan and Roger Balian on the dynamical solution of Curie-Weiss models for quantum measurement. It embodies a certain minimal form of the statistical interpretation and stays clear of ontological connections. Along the way, comments on various related subjects, terms and interpretations are given.

Quantum Physics
The GHSZ argument: a gedankenexperiment requiring more denken

Frank Lad

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/e22070759

2021-07-23

Abstract:I reassess the gedankenexperiment of Greenberger, Horne, Shimony and Zeilinger after twenty-five years, finding their influential claim to discovery of an inconsistency inherent in high dimensional formulations of local realism to arise from a fundamental error of logic. They manage this by presuming contradictory premises: that a specific linear combination of four angles involved in their proposed parallel experiments on two pairs of electrons equals both $\pi$ and $0$ at the same time. Ignoring this while presuming the contradictory implications of these two conditions, they introduce the contradiction themselves. The notation they use in their "derivation" is not sufficiently ornate to represent the entanglement in the double electron spin pair problem they design, confounding their error. The situation they propose actually motivates only an understanding of the full array of symmetries involved in their problem. In tandem with the error now recognized in the supposed defiance of Bell's inequality by quantum probabilities, my reassessment of their work should motivate a reevaluation of the current consensus outlook regarding the principle of local realism and the proposition of hidden variables.

General Physics
Contrary Inferences for Classical Histories within the Consistent Histories Formulation of Quantum Theory

Adamantia Zampeli,Georgios E. Pavlou,Petros Wallden

2024-09-19

Abstract:In the histories formulation of quantum theory, sets of coarse-grained histories, that are called consistent, obey classical probability rules. It has been argued that these sets can describe the semi-classical behaviour of closed quantum systems. Most physical scenarios admit multiple different consistent sets and one can view each consistent set as a separate context. Using propositions from different consistent sets to make inferences leads to paradoxes such as the contrary inferences first noted by Kent [Physical Review Letters, 78(15):2874, 1997]. Proponents of the consistent histories formulation argue that one should not mix propositions coming from different consistent sets in making logical arguments, and that paradoxes such as the aforementioned contrary inferences are nothing else than the usual microscopic paradoxes of quantum contextuality as first demonstrated by Kochen and Specker theorem. In this contribution we use the consistent histories to describe a macroscopic (semi-classical) system to show that paradoxes involving contextuality (mixing different consistent sets) persist even in the semi-classical limit. This is distinctively different from the contextuality of standard quantum theory, where the contextuality paradoxes do not persist in the semi-classical limit. Specifically, we consider different consistent sets for the arrival time of a semi-classical wave packet in an infinite square well. Surprisingly, we get consistent sets that disagree on whether the motion of the semi-classical system, that started within a subregion, ever left that subregion or not. Our results point to the need for constraints, additional to the consistency condition, to recover the correct semi-classical limit in this formalism and lead to the motto `all consistent sets are equal', but `some consistent sets are more equal than others'.

Quantum Physics

Contradictions or Curiosities? On Kent's Critique of the Masanes--Galley--Müller Derivation of the Quantum Measurement Postulates

Response to "The measurement postulates of quantum mechanics are not redundant"

Reply to `No Contradictions between Bohmian and quantum mechanics'

Modality, Potentiality and Contradiction in Quantum Mechanics

Peaceful Coexistence: Examining Kent's Relativistic Solution to the Quantum Measurement Problem

Comment on ``Consistent Sets Yield Contrary Inferences in Quantum Theory''

Non-locality and quasiclassical reality in Kent's formulation of relativistic quantum theory

Comments on Struyve and Baere's paper on experiments to distinguish Bohmian mechanics from quantum mechanics

On the strangeness of quantum mechanics

Discussion: Time-Symmetric Quantum Counterfactuals

The Many Inconsistencies of the Purity-Mixture Distinction in Standard Quantum Mechanics

The Frauchiger-Renner Gedanken Experiment: Flaws in Its Analysis -- How Logic Works in Quantum Mechanics

Weak versus deterministic macroscopic realism, and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen's elements of reality

Notes on the Conway-Kochen Twin Argument

Weak Measurements and Counterfactual Computation

Against (unitary) interpretation (of quantum mechanics): removing the metaphysical load

Remarks on Consistent Histories and Bohmian Mechanics

Logical Inconsistencies in Proofs of the Theorem of Bell

Contra multos verbos: On scandals of quantum mechanics

The GHSZ argument: a gedankenexperiment requiring more denken

Contrary Inferences for Classical Histories within the Consistent Histories Formulation of Quantum Theory