{"title":"Unitary Time Evolution in Quantum Mechanics is a Stronger Physical Postulate than Linear Time Evolution","authors":"Edward Parker","doi":"10.1007/s10701-024-00818-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Discussions of quantum mechanics often loosely claim that time evolution logically must be unitary, in order for the probabilistic interpretation of the amplitudes of the state vector to make sense at all times. We discuss from first principles whether this claim is true: if we assume only that the time-evolution operator is <i>linear</i>, then does the stronger requirement that it be <i>unitary</i> follow from the other axioms of quantum mechanics? The answer is subtle. We discuss two mathematically distinct but physically equivalent formulations of the axioms of quantum mechanics, and consider generalizing each to postulate only that time evolution is linear. Within one formulation, the unitarity of time evolution follows logically from the other axioms – but within the other formulation, it does not. Allowing the time-evolution operator to be (a priori) arbitrarily linear does not change the physical observables in one formulation of quantum mechanics, but changes the other formulation to a <i>distinct</i> (internally consistent) physical theory that allows new phenomenology like (e.g.) faster-than-light communication. Therefore, the unitarity of time evolution is arguably better thought of as a logically independent and experimentally falsifiable axiom of quantum mechanics, not as a tautological consequence of the other axioms.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":569,"journal":{"name":"Foundations of Physics","volume":"55 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10701-024-00818-x.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foundations of Physics","FirstCategoryId":"101","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10701-024-00818-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHYSICS, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Discussions of quantum mechanics often loosely claim that time evolution logically must be unitary, in order for the probabilistic interpretation of the amplitudes of the state vector to make sense at all times. We discuss from first principles whether this claim is true: if we assume only that the time-evolution operator is linear, then does the stronger requirement that it be unitary follow from the other axioms of quantum mechanics? The answer is subtle. We discuss two mathematically distinct but physically equivalent formulations of the axioms of quantum mechanics, and consider generalizing each to postulate only that time evolution is linear. Within one formulation, the unitarity of time evolution follows logically from the other axioms – but within the other formulation, it does not. Allowing the time-evolution operator to be (a priori) arbitrarily linear does not change the physical observables in one formulation of quantum mechanics, but changes the other formulation to a distinct (internally consistent) physical theory that allows new phenomenology like (e.g.) faster-than-light communication. Therefore, the unitarity of time evolution is arguably better thought of as a logically independent and experimentally falsifiable axiom of quantum mechanics, not as a tautological consequence of the other axioms.
期刊介绍：
The conceptual foundations of physics have been under constant revision from the outset, and remain so today. Discussion of foundational issues has always been a major source of progress in science, on a par with empirical knowledge and mathematics. Examples include the debates on the nature of space and time involving Newton and later Einstein; on the nature of heat and of energy; on irreversibility and probability due to Boltzmann; on the nature of matter and observation measurement during the early days of quantum theory; on the meaning of renormalisation, and many others.
Today, insightful reflection on the conceptual structure utilised in our efforts to understand the physical world is of particular value, given the serious unsolved problems that are likely to demand, once again, modifications of the grammar of our scientific description of the physical world. The quantum properties of gravity, the nature of measurement in quantum mechanics, the primary source of irreversibility, the role of information in physics – all these are examples of questions about which science is still confused and whose solution may well demand more than skilled mathematics and new experiments.
Foundations of Physics is a privileged forum for discussing such foundational issues, open to physicists, cosmologists, philosophers and mathematicians. It is devoted to the conceptual bases of the fundamental theories of physics and cosmology, to their logical, methodological, and philosophical premises.
The journal welcomes papers on issues such as the foundations of special and general relativity, quantum theory, classical and quantum field theory, quantum gravity, unified theories, thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, cosmology, and similar.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
