Understanding Superselection: Rules & Interactions with Environment

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Imparcticle
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the concept of superselection in quantum mechanics, exploring its definitions, implications, and the distinctions between hard and soft superselection rules. Participants delve into theoretical aspects, potential demonstrations, and the relationship between superselection and decoherence.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on the definition of superselection, noting that it is related to interactions with the environment.
  • Another participant defines superselection as the impossibility of superposing certain states, such as boson and fermion states or different electric charge states, and connects this to the decoherence principle.
  • Hard superselection is described as being rigorously demonstrable from symmetry considerations, while soft superselection is linked to dynamical processes influenced by environmental interactions, leading to decoherence.
  • A request for demonstrations of hard superselection cases is made, expressing skepticism about the validity of existing demonstrations that rely on external arguments.
  • Soft superselection is mentioned as often being used as a shortcut in quantum measurement explanations, with a call for rigorous demonstrations to aid understanding.
  • A later reply references Schur's lemma and discusses the relationship between Hilbert spaces and C*-algebras, suggesting a mathematical framework for understanding superselection rules.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity and demonstration of hard and soft superselection rules, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives on the topic.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note limitations in existing demonstrations and the need for rigorous proofs, particularly regarding soft superselection rules and their implications for quantum measurement processes.

Imparcticle
Messages
572
Reaction score
4
What is superselection?

I have only learned that "superselection rules are induced by interactions with the environment." Can someone eleborate?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Superselection as I have been using it refers to rules stating the impossibility to superpose specific states. For instance, it is impossible to have a superposition of boson and fermion states, or to superpose different electric charge states. This is in contrast with the fundamental linearity of QM. Also, the impossibility to have macroscopic objects superposed into spatially separated states, or localisation of macroscopic systems, is also related to superselection, via the decoherence principle.

It is often argued that there are two types of superselection, referred to as hard and soft. Hard superselection applies for instance for the charge, the mass, or the spin, and can rigorousy be demonstrated from symmetry considerations. Soft superselection refer to a dynamical process, indeed induced by environment, and has applications for instance in solid state physics. The interaction with the environment is introduced by a random noise term in the Hamiltonian, yielding a disturbance or phase randomization, which in turn provokes decoherence. This is basically a transition from quantum to classical probability, due to non-diagonal elements of the density matrix averaging to zero whereas the diagonal elements do not. Non-diagonal elements are scalar product between states having different random phases, whereas the (identical) states in the scalar product for the diagonal elements have a coherent (the same) phase and do not average to zero.

"Lectures on decoherence", A. Armour
 
Have you got a good demonstration on a hard superselection case (charge, mass or spin)? It will be a pleasure to know such one :shy: . The demos (I know) have always introduced at the final step an argument that is external to the theory and seems not to be required (thus unvalidating the demo).

The soft superselections are almost always used in texts as a short cut to explain the result of a measurement in QM (like the selection of a preferred basis in the decoherence model of measurement - subject that is currently under investigation). I don't konw any soft superselection rule (at least that seems serious), so rigorous demonstration for such ones are also wecome as they can help to understand the measurement process in the quantum theroy.
 
Nobody else answered... I am not home, I don't have access to my books, but I thought it was basically the same as in Schur's lemma. We have a Hilbert space that is the sum of several representations of a C*-algebra, and each sector has different charges. Googling gave me that
[URL='https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/author/john-baez/' said:
John Baez[/URL]]You can think of mathematicians as physicists who only do trivial
observations. So the C*-algebra of observables for a mathematician
consists only of scalar multiples of the identity. These are the
observables that don't depend on anything about the state of the
universe! This little C*-algebra forms a copy of the complex numbers
sitting in the center of the larger C*-algebra of observables used by
the physicist. The only laws of physics the mathematician can express
are trivial ones like 1 + 1 = 2, which involve observables living in the
mathematician's C*-algebra.

When the physicist's C*-algebra has a nontrivial center, things get a
little more interesting: we have the C*-algebra of the mathematician,
the C*-algebra of the physicist, and the center of the latter algebra,
which we could call "the C*-algebra of the classical physicist". The
classical physicist can ignore noncommutativity, but is restricted to
talking about very special things - observables that commute with all
others. Such quantities must be conserved and Lorentz-invariant, for
starters! Famous examples include the total electric charge of the
universe, or the total lepton number, or the total baryon number - in
models where these quantities are conserved.
I did not manage to find anything else relevant for you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
916