Skip to main content
Log in

Completing the Quantum Formalism in a Contextually Objective Framework

  • Published:
Foundations of Physics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In standard quantum mechanics (QM), a state vector \(| \psi \rangle \) may belong to infinitely many different orthogonal bases, as soon as the dimension N of the Hilbert space is at least three. On the other hand, a complete physical observable A (with no degeneracy left) is associated with a N-dimensional orthogonal basis of eigenvectors. In an idealized case, measuring A again and again will give repeatedly the same result, with the same eigenvalue. Let us call this repeatable result a modality \(\mu \), and the corresponding eigenstate \(| \psi \rangle \). A question is then: does \(| \psi \rangle \) give a complete description of \(\mu \) ? The answer is obviously no, since \(| \psi \rangle \) does not specify the full observable A that allowed us to obtain \(\mu \); hence the physical description given by \(| \psi \rangle \) is incomplete, as claimed by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen in their famous article in 1935. Here we want to spell out this provocative statement, and in particular to answer the questions: if \(| \psi \rangle \) is an incomplete description of \(\mu \), what does it describe ? is it possible to obtain a complete description, maybe algebraic? Our conclusion is that the incompleteness of standard QM is due to its attempt to describe systems without contexts, whereas both are always required, even if they can be separated outside the measurement periods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In QM the assignment of values to measurement results is contextual (Kochen-Specker theorem), whereas the assignment of probabilities to measurement results is non-contextual (Gleason theorem, see also [7]). This creates endless confusions in the terminology, and extracontextuality is a good way out of them. For projectors eigenvalues 0 and 1 are contextual, whereas average values (probabilities) are non-contextual; this is another way to tell that there is no dispersion-free state

  2. The litterature on algebraic QM is huge, see e.g. [15] for a classic textbook, and [16,17,18] for recent introductions and results; for more references see also [6, 7].

  3. In [14] an incomplete direct product (i.e. a a sector in modern terminology) is defined as an equivalence class between vectors belonging to the infinite direct product. This idea can be extended in the algebraic framework, and an essential feature is that the asymptotic information about the sector can be encoded in a concise way, without specifying the full algebra (see e.g. Chi-Keung Ng, “On genuine infinite algebraic tensor products”, http://arxiv.org/abs/arXiv:1112.3128)

References

  1. Grangier, P.: Contextual objectivity: a realistic interpretation of quantum mechanics. Eur. J. Phys. 23(3), 331 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Auffèves, A., Grangier, P.: Contexts, systems and modalities: a new ontology for quantum mechanics. Found. Phys. 46, 121 (2016)

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Auffèves, A., Grangier, P.: Violation of Bell’s inequalities in a quantum realistic framework. Int. J. Quantum Inform. 14, 1640002 (2016)

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Auffèves, A., Grangier, P.: Recovering the quantum formalism from physically realist axioms. Sci. Rep. 7, 43365 (2017)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  5. Auffèves, A., Grangier, P.: Extracontextuality and extravalence in quantum mechanics. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 376, 20170311 (2018)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. Auffèves, A., Grangier, P.: A generic model for quantum measurements. Entropy 21, 904 (2019)

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Auffèves, A., Grangier, P.: Deriving Born’s rule from an inference to the best explanation. Found. Phys. 50, 1781–1793 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-020-00326-8

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Grangier, P.: Completing the quantum formalism: why and how ? arXiv:2003.03121v2

  9. Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., Rosen, N.: Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  10. Bohr, N.: Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Phys. Rev. 48, 696 (1935)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bell, J.S.: On the Einstein–Podolski–Rosen paradox. Physics 1, 195 (1964)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Aspect, A.: Closing the door on Einstein and Bohr’s quantum debate. Physics 8, 123 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Laloë, F.: Do We Really Understand Quantum Mechanics?. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2012)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. von Neumann, J.: On infinite direct products. Compositio Mathematica 6, 1–77 (1939)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Emch, G.G.: Algebraic Methods in Statistical Mechanics and Quantum Field Theory. Dover, New York, 2000 (reprint of the Wiley-Interscience 1972 edition)

  16. Fewster, C.J., Rejzner, K.: Algebraic Quantum Field Theory - an introduction. arXiv:1904.04051

  17. Lledó, F.: Operator algebras: an informal overview. arXiv:0901.0232

  18. Buchholz, D., Fredenhagen, K.: A \(C^*\)-algebraic approach to interacting quantum field theories. Commun. Math. Phy. 377, 947–969 (2020) [arXiv:1902.06062]

  19. Allahverdyana, A.E., Balian, R., Nieuwenhuizen, T.M.: Understanding quantum measurement from the solution of dynamical models. Phys. Rep. 525(1), 1–166 (2013)

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Baez, J.: Bell’s inequalities for \(\text{ C}^*\)-Algebras. Lett. Math. Phys. 13, 135–136 (1987)

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author thanks Alexia Auffèves, Nayla Farouki, Franck Laloë and Roger Balian for many useful discussions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philippe Grangier.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author did not receive any specific support for the submitted work, he has no relevant financial or non-financial interest to disclose, and no conflict of interest whatsoever relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Grangier, P. Completing the Quantum Formalism in a Contextually Objective Framework. Found Phys 51, 76 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-021-00424-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-021-00424-1

Keywords

Navigation