量子力学中的可分性问题:来自公理化和人类语言研究的见解。

IF 3.7 3区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Diederik Aerts, Jonito Aerts Arguelles, Lester Beltran, Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi, Sandro Sozzo
{"title":"量子力学中的可分性问题:来自公理化和人类语言研究的见解。","authors":"Diederik Aerts, Jonito Aerts Arguelles, Lester Beltran, Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi, Sandro Sozzo","doi":"10.1098/rsta.2023.0284","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Einstein's article on the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox is the most cited of his works, but not many know that it was not fully representative of the way he thought about the incompleteness of the quantum formalism. Indeed, his main worry was not Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, which he accepted, but the experimental <i>non-separability</i> of spatially separate systems. The same problem was also recognized, years later, by one of us, as part of an axiomatic analysis of the quantum formalism, which revealed an unexpected structural limitation of the quantum formalism in Hilbert space, preventing the description of separate systems. As we will explain, this limitation does not manifest at the level of the states, but of the projectors describing the properties, in the sense that there are not enough properties in the formalism to describe separate systems. The question remains whether <i>separability</i> is a possibility at the fundamental level and if a formalism should integrate it into its mathematical structure, as a possibility. To aid our intuition, we offer a reflection based on a powerful analogy between physical systems and human conceptual entities, as the question of separability also arises for the latter.This article is part of the theme issue 'Newton, <i>Principia</i>, Newton Geneva Edition (17th-19th) and modern Newtonian mechanics: heritage, past & present'.</p>","PeriodicalId":19879,"journal":{"name":"Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences","volume":"383 2301","pages":"20230284"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The separability problem in quantum mechanics: insights from research on axiomatics and human language.\",\"authors\":\"Diederik Aerts, Jonito Aerts Arguelles, Lester Beltran, Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi, Sandro Sozzo\",\"doi\":\"10.1098/rsta.2023.0284\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Einstein's article on the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox is the most cited of his works, but not many know that it was not fully representative of the way he thought about the incompleteness of the quantum formalism. Indeed, his main worry was not Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, which he accepted, but the experimental <i>non-separability</i> of spatially separate systems. The same problem was also recognized, years later, by one of us, as part of an axiomatic analysis of the quantum formalism, which revealed an unexpected structural limitation of the quantum formalism in Hilbert space, preventing the description of separate systems. As we will explain, this limitation does not manifest at the level of the states, but of the projectors describing the properties, in the sense that there are not enough properties in the formalism to describe separate systems. The question remains whether <i>separability</i> is a possibility at the fundamental level and if a formalism should integrate it into its mathematical structure, as a possibility. To aid our intuition, we offer a reflection based on a powerful analogy between physical systems and human conceptual entities, as the question of separability also arises for the latter.This article is part of the theme issue 'Newton, <i>Principia</i>, Newton Geneva Edition (17th-19th) and modern Newtonian mechanics: heritage, past & present'.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19879,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences\",\"volume\":\"383 2301\",\"pages\":\"20230284\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"103\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2023.0284\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"综合性期刊\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2023.0284","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

爱因斯坦关于爱因斯坦-波多尔斯基-罗森悖论的文章是他被引用最多的作品,但没有多少人知道,这篇文章并不能完全代表他对量子形式主义不完备性的看法。事实上,他主要担心的不是他接受的海森堡的测不准原理,而是空间分离系统的实验不可分性。多年以后,我们中的一个人,也发现了同样的问题,作为量子形式主义的公理化分析的一部分,它揭示了希尔伯特空间中量子形式主义的一个意想不到的结构限制,阻止了对独立系统的描述。正如我们将要解释的那样,这种限制并不表现在状态的层面上,而是表现在描述属性的投射者的层面上,也就是说,在形式主义中没有足够的属性来描述单独的系统。问题仍然是可分性是否在基本层面上是一种可能性,以及形式主义是否应该将其作为一种可能性整合到其数学结构中。为了帮助我们的直觉,我们提供了一个基于物理系统和人类概念实体之间强大类比的反思,因为后者也出现了可分离性问题。本文是主题问题“牛顿,原理,牛顿日内瓦版(17 -19)和现代牛顿力学:遗产,过去和现在”的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The separability problem in quantum mechanics: insights from research on axiomatics and human language.

Einstein's article on the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox is the most cited of his works, but not many know that it was not fully representative of the way he thought about the incompleteness of the quantum formalism. Indeed, his main worry was not Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, which he accepted, but the experimental non-separability of spatially separate systems. The same problem was also recognized, years later, by one of us, as part of an axiomatic analysis of the quantum formalism, which revealed an unexpected structural limitation of the quantum formalism in Hilbert space, preventing the description of separate systems. As we will explain, this limitation does not manifest at the level of the states, but of the projectors describing the properties, in the sense that there are not enough properties in the formalism to describe separate systems. The question remains whether separability is a possibility at the fundamental level and if a formalism should integrate it into its mathematical structure, as a possibility. To aid our intuition, we offer a reflection based on a powerful analogy between physical systems and human conceptual entities, as the question of separability also arises for the latter.This article is part of the theme issue 'Newton, Principia, Newton Geneva Edition (17th-19th) and modern Newtonian mechanics: heritage, past & present'.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.30
自引率
2.00%
发文量
367
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Continuing its long history of influential scientific publishing, Philosophical Transactions A publishes high-quality theme issues on topics of current importance and general interest within the physical, mathematical and engineering sciences, guest-edited by leading authorities and comprising new research, reviews and opinions from prominent researchers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信