Part II - Information and Quantum Mechanics
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 July 2017
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- What is Quantum Information? , pp. 77 - 144Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2017
References
References
Colbeck, R. and Renner, R. (2011). ‘No Extension of Quantum Theory Can Have Improved Predictive Power’. Nature Communications, 2: 411.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Colbeck, R. and Renner, R. (2012). ‘Free Randomness Can be Amplified’. Nature Physics, 7: 450–454.Google Scholar
Einstein, A. (1948). ‘Quanten-Mechanik und Wirklichkeit’. Dialectica, 2: 320–324. English translation: ‘Quantum Mechanics and Reality’. Pp. 168–173 in Born, M. (ed.), The Born-Einstein Letters. New York: Walker.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gleason, A. N. (1957). ‘Measures on the Closed Subspaces of Hilbert Space’. Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics, 6: 885–893.Google Scholar
Heisenberg, W. (1925). ‘Über Quantentheoretischer Umdeutung Kinematischer und Mechanischer Beziehungen’. Zeitschrift für Physik, 33: 879–893.Google Scholar
Popescu, S. (2014). ‘Nonlocality beyond Quantum Mechanics’. Nature Physics, 10: 264–270.Google Scholar
Schrödinger, E. (1935). ‘Discussion of Probability Relations Between Separated Systems’. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 31: 555–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shannon, C. E. (1948). ‘A Mathematical Theory of Communication’. Bell System Technical Journal, 27: 379–423, 623–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Von Neumann, J. (1962). ‘Quantum Logics (Strict- and Probability-Logics)’. Pp. 195–197 in von Neumann, J., Collected Works, Vol. 4. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
References
Barrett, S. D. and Kok, P. (2005). “Efficient High-Fidelity Quantum Computation Using Matter Qubits and Linear Optics.” Physical Review A, 71: 060310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caulton, A. (2014). “Qualitative Individuation in Permutation-Invariant Quantum Mechanics.” arXiv:1409.0247v1 [quant-ph].Google Scholar
Dieks, D. (1988). “Overlap and Distinguishability of Quantum States.” Physics Letters A, 126: 303–306.Google Scholar
Dieks, D. (2014). “The Logic of Identity: Distinguishability and Indistinguishability in Classical and Quantum Physics.” Foundations of Physics, 44: 1302–1316.Google Scholar
Dieks, D. (2017). “Niels Bohr and the Formalism of Quantum Mechanics.” Forthcoming in Folse, H. and Faye, J. (eds.), Niels Bohr and Philosophy of Physics: Twenty First Century Perspectives. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
Dieks, D. and Lubberdink, A. (2011). “How Classical Particles Emerge from the Quantum World.” Foundations of Physics, 41: 1051–1064.Google Scholar
Dieks, D. and Versteegh, M. A. M. (2008). “Identical Particles and Weak Discernibility.” Foundations of Physics, 38: 923–934.Google Scholar
Ehrenfest, T. and Ehrenfest, T. (1909). Begriffliche Grundlagen der statistischen Auffassung in der Mechanik. Leipzig: Teubner. English translation: Conceptual Foundations of the Statistical Approach in Mechanics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1959.Google Scholar
Ghirardi, G., Marinatto, L., and Weber, T. (2002). “Entanglement and Properties of Composite Quantum Systems: A Conceptual and Mathematical Analysis.” Journal of Statistical Physics, 108: 49–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giustina, M., Versteegh, A. M. et al. (2015). “Significant-Loophole-Free Test of Bell’s Theorem with Entangled Photons.” Physical Review Letters, 115: 250401.Google Scholar
Hensen, B. et al. (2015). “Loophole-Free Bell Inequality Violation Using Electron Spins Separated by 1.3 Kilometers.” Nature, 526: 682–686.Google Scholar
Jaeger, G. and Shimony, A. (1995). “Optimal Distinction between Two Non-orthogonal Quantum States.” Physics Letters A, 197: 83–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ladyman, J., Linnebo, Ø., and Bigaj, T. (2013). “Entanglement and Non-factorizability.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 44: 215–221.Google Scholar
Lombardi, O. and Dieks, D. (2016a). “Modal Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics.” In Zalta, E. N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Winter 2016 Edition. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/qm-modal/Google Scholar
Lombardi, O. and Dieks, D. (2016b). “Particles in a Quantum Ontology of Properties.” Pp. 123–143 in Bigaj, T. and Wüthrich, C. (eds.), Metaphysics in Contemporary Physics. Leiden: Rodopi-Brill.Google Scholar
Rosaler, J. (2016). “Interpretation Neutrality in the Classical Domain of Quantum Theory.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 53: 54–72.Google Scholar
Shannon, C. E. (1948). “The Mathematical Theory of Communication.” Bell Systems Technical Journal, 27: 379–423, 623–656.Google Scholar
References
Balter, M. (2010). “Did Working Memory Spark Creative Culture?” Science, 328: 160–163.Google Scholar
Bickerton, D. (1995). Language and Human Behavior. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Bouwmeester, D., Pan, J. W., Mattle, K., Eibl, M., Weinfurter, H., and Zeilinger, A. (1997). “Experimental Quantum Teleportation.” Nature, 390: 575–579.Google Scholar
Hackermüller, L., Hornberger, K., Brezger, B., Zeilinger, A., and Arndt, M. (2004). “Decoherence of Matter Waves by Thermal Emission of Radiation.” Nature, 427: 711–714.Google Scholar
Han, C. J., O’Tuathaigh, C. M., Van Trigt, L., Quinn, J. J., Fanselau, M. S., Mongeau, R., Koch, C., and Anderson, D. J. (2003). “Trace but not Delay Fear Conditioning Requires Attention and the Anterior Cingulated Cortex.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 100: 13087–13092.Google Scholar
Kocsis, S., Braverman, B., Ravets, S., Stevens, M. J., Mirin, R. P., Shalm, L. K., and Steinberg, A. M. (2011). “Observing the Average Trajectories of Single Photons in a Two-Slit Interferometer.” Science, 332: 1170–1173.Google Scholar
Roederer, J. G. (1978). “On the Relationship Between Human Brain Functions and the Foundations of Physics.” Foundations of Physics, 8: 423–438.Google Scholar
Roederer, J. G. (2003). “Information and Its Role in Nature.” Entropy, 5: 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roederer, J. G. (2004). “When and Where Did Information First Appear in the Universe?” Pp. 23–42 in New Avenues in Bioinformatics, Seckbach, J. and Rubin, E. (eds.). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Roederer, J. G. (2005). Information and Its Role in Nature. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Roederer, J. G. (2016). “Pragmatic Information in Biology and Physics.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 374: 20150152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schlosshauer, M. (2008). Decoherence and the Quantum-to-Classical Transition. Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Shannon, C. E. and Weaver, W. (1949). The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Champaign: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Steane, A. M. (2007). “Context, Spacetime Loops and the Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 40: 3223–3243.Google Scholar
Tononi, G. and Koch, C. (2008). “The Neural Correlates of Consciousness: An Update.” Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 1124: 239–261.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, S. I., Kim, H., and Davies, P. C. W. (2016). “The Informational Architecture of the Cell.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 374: 20150057.Google Scholar
Wheeler, J. A. (1989). “Information, Physics, Quantum: The Search for Links.” Pp. 354–368 in Ezawa, H., Kobayashi, S. I., and Murayama, Y. (eds.), Proceedings III International Symposium on Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Tokyo: Physical Society of Japan.Google Scholar
References
Ballentine, L. E. (1970). “The Statistical Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.” Reviews of Modern Physics, 42: 358–381.Google Scholar
Barnum, H., Müller, M. P., and Ududec, C. (2014). “Higher-Order Interference and Single-System Postulates Characterizing Quantum Theory.” New Journal of Physics, 16: 123029.Google Scholar
Belinfante, F. J. (1973). A Survey of Hidden-Variables Theories. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Bell, J. S. (1976). “The Theory of Local Beables.” Epistemological Letters, 9. Reprinted in (1985) Dialectica, 39: 85–96.Google Scholar
Bohm, D. (1952). “A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of Hidden Variables. I & II.” Physical Review, 85: 166–193.Google Scholar
Bohr, N. (1998). The Philosophical Writings of Niels Bohr. Faye, J. and Folse, H. J. (eds.). Woodbridge, CT: Ox Bow Press.Google Scholar
Brukner, Č. (2016). “On the Quantum Measurement Problem.” Pp. 95–117 in Bertlmann, R. and Zeilinger, A. (eds.), Quantum UnSpeakables II: Half a Century of Bell’s Theorem. Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
Bub, J. (1997). Interpreting the Quantum World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cabello, A. (2013). “Simple Explanation of the Quantum Violation of a Fundamental Inequality.” Physical Review Letters, 110: 060402.Google Scholar
Cabello, A., Gu, M., Gühne, O., Larsson, J.-Å., and Wiesner, K. (2016). “Thermodynamical Cost of Some Interpretations of Quantum Theory.” Physical Review A, 94: 052127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiribella, G., D’Ariano, G. M., and Perinotti, P. (2011). “Informational Derivation of Quantum Theory.” Physical Review A, 84: 012311.Google Scholar
Chiribella, G. and Yuan, X. (2014). “Measurement Sharpness Cuts Nonlocality and Contextuality in Every Physical Theory.” arXiv:1404.3348.Google Scholar
Dakić, B. and Brukner, Č. (2011). “Quantum Theory and Beyond: Is Entanglement Special?” Pp. 365–392 in Halvorson, H. (ed.), Deep Beauty. Understanding the Quantum World through Mathematical Innovation. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dickson, W. M. (1998). Quantum Chance and Nonlocality: Probability and Nonlocality in the Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Einstein, A. (1936). “Physics and Reality.” Journal of the Franklin Institute, 221: 349–382.Google Scholar
Everett, H. III (1957). “‘Relative State’ Formulation of Quantum Mechanics.” Reviews of Modern Physics, 29: 454–462.Google Scholar
Faye, J. (2014). “Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.” In Zalta, E. N. (ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu). Stanford, CA: Stanford University.Google Scholar
Fuchs, C. A. (2017). “On Participatory Realism.” Pp. 113–134 in Durham, I. T. and Rickles, D. (eds.), Information and Interaction: Eddington, Wheeler, and the Limits of Knowledge. Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
Fuchs, C. A., Mermin, N. D., and Schack, R. (2014). “An Introduction to QBism with an Application to the Locality of Quantum Mechanics.” American Journal of Physics, 82: 749–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuchs, C. A. and Peres, A. (2000). “Quantum Theory Needs no ‘Interpretation.’” Physics Today, 53: 70–71.Google Scholar
Fuchs, C. A. and Schack, R. (2013). “Quantum-Bayesian Coherence.” Reviews of Modern Physics, 85: 1693–1714.Google Scholar
Ghirardi, G. C. (2011). “Collapse Theories.” In Zalta, E. N. (ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu). Stanford, CA: Stanford University.Google Scholar
Ghirardi, G. C., Rimini, A., and Weber, T. (1986). “Unified Dynamics for Microscopic and Macroscopic Systems.” Physical Review D, 34: 470–491.Google Scholar
Gisin, N. (2012). “Non-realism: Deep Thought or a Soft Option?” Foundations of Physics, 42: 80–85.Google Scholar
Goldstein, S. (2013). “Bohmian Mechanics.” In Zalta, E. N. (ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu). Stanford, CA: Stanford University.Google Scholar
Griffiths, R. B. (1984). “Consistent Histories and the Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.” Journal of Statistical Physics, 36: 219–272.Google Scholar
Griffiths, R. B. (2014). “The Consistent Histories Approach to Quantum Mechanics.” In Zalta, E. N. (ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu). Stanford, CA: Stanford University.Google Scholar
Harrigan, N. and Spekkens, R. W. (2010). “Einstein, Incompleteness, and the Epistemic View of Quantum States.” Foundations of Physics, 40: 125–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hensen, B. et al. (2015). “Loophole-Free Bell Inequality Violation Using Electron Spins Separated by 1.3 Kilometres.” Nature, 526: 682–686.Google Scholar
Jammer, M. (1974). The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics: The Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics in Historical Perspective. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Kochen, S. (1985). “A New Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.” Pp. 151–169 in Lahti, P. J. and Mittelstaedt, P. (eds.), Symposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics: 50 Years of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Experiment. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar
Kochen, S. and Specker, E. P. (1967). “The Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics.” Journal of Mathematical Mechanics, 17: 59–87.Google Scholar
Leifer, M. S. (2014). “Is the Wavefunction Real?” Unpublished talk at the 12th Biennial IQSA Meeting Quantum Structures (Olomouc, Czech Republic).Google Scholar
Lombardi, O. and Dieks, D. (2012). “Modal Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics.” In Zalta, E. N. (ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu). Stanford, CA: Stanford University.Google Scholar
Masanes, L. and Müller, M. P. (2011). “A Derivation of Quantum Theory from Physical Requirements.” New Journal of Physics, 13: 063001.Google Scholar
Mermin, N. D. (2012). “Quantum Mechanics: Fixing the Shifty Split.” Physics Today, 65: 8–10.Google Scholar
Pusey, M. F., Barrett, J., and Rudolph, T. (2012). “On the Reality of the Quantum State.” Nature Physics, 8: 475–478.Google Scholar
Rovelli, C. (1996). “Relational Quantum Mechanics.” International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 35: 1637–1678.Google Scholar
Spekkens, R. W. (2007). “Evidence for the Epistemic View of Quantum States: A Toy Theory.” Physical Review A, 75: 032110.Google Scholar
Vaidman, L. (2015). “Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.” In Zalta, E. N. (ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu). Stanford, CA: Stanford University.Google Scholar
Van Fraassen, B. C. (1972). “A Formal Approach to the Philosophy of Science.” Pp. 303–366 in Colodny, R. (ed.), Paradigms and Paradoxes: The Philosophical Challenge of the Quantum Domain. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Wheeler, J. A. (1983). “Law without Law.” Pp. 182–213 in Wheeler, J. A. and Zurek, W. H. (eds.), Quantum Theory and Measurement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wheeler, J. A. (1994). At Home in the Universe. Woodbury-New York: American Institute of Physics Press.Google Scholar
Zeilinger, A. (1999). “A Foundational Principle for Quantum Mechanics.” Foundations of Physics, 29: 631–643.Google Scholar