The wave-function as a true ensemble

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bohm2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ensemble
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the inadequacy of the ψ-ontic/epistemic distinction in identifying ensemble interpretations of quantum mechanics. It is established that all ψ-ensemble interpretations that reproduce quantum mechanics violate Statistical Independence. The conversation highlights the flexibility of defining 'ontic' in relation to hidden variables and emphasizes the importance of a rigorous definition to avoid ambiguity in theoretical frameworks.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles
  • Familiarity with the ψ-ontic and ψ-epistemic interpretations
  • Knowledge of Statistical Independence in quantum theory
  • Basic concepts of observable operators in quantum mechanics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of Statistical Independence in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the differences between ψ-ontic and ψ-epistemic interpretations
  • Study the role of hidden variables in quantum theories
  • Examine the mathematical formulation of observable operators in quantum mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, theoretical physicists, and researchers interested in the foundations of quantum mechanics and the interpretation of wave-functions.

bohm2
Science Advisor
Messages
828
Reaction score
55
"We argue that the ψ-ontic/epistemic distinction fails to properly identify ensemble interpretations and propose a more useful definition. We then show that all ψ-ensemble interpretations which reproduce quantum mechanics violate Statistical Independence."

https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.02676
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier
Physics news on Phys.org
"Suppose you have a theory that isn’t ontic because two of the hidden variables map to the same wave-function. Well, then you can just declare the wave-function to be part of the hidden variables, so that the new hidden variables – now including the wave-function – will always map to only one wave-function. Such an easily malleable definition of ‘ontic’ is not what one wants to base theorems on."

This is an interesting point. If I have a quantum state ##\psi##, I can always define an observable $$\hat{O} = \lambda_\psi|\psi\rangle\langle\psi| + \lambda_{\not\psi}(\hat{I} - |\psi\rangle\langle\psi|)$$ We have a property ##\lambda_\psi## resolvable (in principle) by experiment, that ##\psi## predicts with certainty. All other pure states will predict ##\lambda_{\not\psi}## with certainty. Make this variable a real hidden variable and voila, your wavefunction uniquely characterises the physical state of the system.
 
Morbert said:
"All other pure states will predict ##\lambda_{\not\psi}## with certainty.
No, they won't. Only pure states orthogonal to ##\psi## will.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: gentzen and vanhees71
Oops stupid mistake
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier and gentzen

Similar threads

  • · Replies 84 ·
3
Replies
84
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 199 ·
7
Replies
199
Views
14K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K