Response to "The measurement postulates of quantum mechanics are not redundant"
Adrian Kent has recently presented a critique \cite{Kent} of our paper \cite{MGM} in which he claims to refute our main result: the measurement postulates of quantum mechanics can be derived from the rest of postulates, once we assume that the set of mixed states of a finite-dimensional Hilbert spac...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Verein zur Förderung des Open Access Publizierens in den Quantenwissenschaften
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | Quantum |
| Online Access: | https://quantum-journal.org/papers/q-2025-01-14-1592/pdf/ |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Adrian Kent has recently presented a critique \cite{Kent} of our paper \cite{MGM} in which he claims to refute our main result: the measurement postulates of quantum mechanics can be derived from the rest of postulates, once we assume that the set of mixed states of a finite-dimensional Hilbert space is finite-dimensional. To construct his argument, Kent considers theories resulting from supplementing quantum mechanics with hypothetical ``post-quantum'' measurement devices. We prove that each of these theories contains pure states (i.e. states of maximal knowledge) which are not rays of the Hilbert space, in contradiction with the ``pure state postulate'' of quantum mechanics. We also prove that these alternatives violate the finite-dimensionality of mixed states. Each of these two facts separately invalidates the refutation. In this note we also clarify the assumptions used in \cite{MGM} and discuss the notions of pure state, physical system, and the sensitivity of the structure of the state space under modifications of the measurements or the dynamics. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2521-327X |