Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Foundations
Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations
Axiom System and Completeness Expression for Quantum Mechanics
arXiv
Authors: Carsten Held
Year
2007
Paper ID
50242
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
145
Citations
N/A
Abstract
The standard axiomatization of quantum mechanics (QM) is not fully explicit about the role of the time-parameter. Especially, the time reference within the probability algorithm (the Born Rule, BR) is unclear. Using a plausible principle P1, about the role of probability in a physical theory, and a second principle P2 affording a most natural way to make BR precise, a logical conflict with the standard expression for the completeness of QM can be derived. Rejecting P1 is implausible. Rejecting P2 leads to unphysical results and to a conflict with a generalization of P2, a principle P3. It is thus made plausible that the standard expression of QM completeness must be revised. An absolutely explicit form of the axioms is provided, including a precise form of the projection postulate. An appropriate expression for QM completeness, reflecting the restrictions of the Gleason and Kochen-Specker theorems is proposed.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2007 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- The standard axiomatization of quantum mechanics (QM) is not fully explicit about the role of the time-parameter.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.