Quantum Histories and Their Implications

Simple item page
dc.creatorKent, Adrian
dc.date1996-07-30
dc.date2000-05-23
dc.date.accessioned2026-07-07T08:59:35Z
dc.date.available2026-07-07T08:59:35Z
dc.descriptionClassical mechanics and standard Copenhagen quantum mechanics respect subspace implications. For example, if a particle is confined in a particular region $R$ of space, then in these theories we can deduce that it is confined in regions containing $R$. However, subspace implications are generally violated by versions of quantum theory that assign probabilities to histories, such as the consistent histories approach. I define here a new criterion, ordered consistency, which refines the criterion of consistency and has the property that inferences made by ordered consistent sets do not violate subspace relations. This raises the question: do the operators defining our observations form an ordered consistent history? If so, ordered consistency defines a version of quantum theory with greater predictive power than the consistent histories formalism. If not, and our observations are defined by a non-ordered consistent quantum history, then subspace implications are not generally valid.
dc.descriptionTo appear in ``Relativistic Quantum Measurement and Decoherence'', F. Petruccione (ed.), Springer-Verlag
dc.identifierhttps://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9607073
dc.identifierhttp://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9607073
dc.identifierLect.Notes Phys. 559 (2000) 93-115
dc.identifier.urihttp://salesiana.dossiersoluciones.com/handle/123456789/147763
dc.subjectGeneral Relativity and Quantum Cosmology
dc.subjectQuantum Physics
dc.titleQuantum Histories and Their Implications
dc.typetext

Files

Collections

arXiv