论文标题
没有纯化本体，没有量子悖论
No purification ontology, no quantum paradoxes
论文作者
论文摘要
几乎普遍认为，在量子理论中，以下两个陈述成立：1）所有转换都是通过统一相互作用，然后进行von Neumann测量来实现的； 2）所有混合状态都是纯净状态的边际。我将此学说命名为纯化本体论的教条。教条的来源是该理论的原始von Neumann公理化，这在很大程度上依赖于施罗丁格方程式作为假设，它在非依赖主义的背景下，其操作员版本仅在自由量子场理论中保留，但不再具有相互作用的理论。在本文中，我证明了单位性和状态纯度的本体论都是不可分割的，即使是原则上，因此在公理上都是虚假的。相反，我提出了一个最小的四个稳定的公理化：1）将Hilbert Space HA与每个系统a相关联； 2）由张量产品规则hab = haxhb组成两个系统； 3）将从系统A到B的转换与量子操作相关联，即与A和B的微量级运算符之间完全积极的痕迹添加图； 4）（出生规则）通过特殊类型的量子操作评估所有联合概率：状态准备。然后，我得出的结论是，量子悖论类似于Schroedinger-cat的悖论，最相关的是，信息悖论仅由纯化本体论的教条起源，并且它们不再是该理论的悖论，而在最小的公式中。出于同样的原因，该理论的大多数解释（例如，许多世界，关系，达尔文主义，交易，冯·诺伊曼·瓦尼克，时间对称，...）解释了相同的教条，而不是剥夺了伪造假设的严格理论。
It is almost universally believed that in quantum theory the two following statements hold: 1) all transformations are achieved by a unitary interaction followed by a von Neumann measurement; 2) all mixed states are marginals of pure entangled states. I name this doctrine the dogma of purification ontology. The source of the dogma is the original von Neumann axiomatisation of the theory, which largely relies on the Schroedinger equation as a postulate, which holds in a nonrelativistic context, and whose operator version holds only in free quantum field theory, but no longer in the interacting theory. In the present paper I prove that both ontologies of unitarity and state purity are unfalsifiable, even in principle, and therefore axiomatically spurious. I propose instead a minimal four-postulate axiomatisation: 1) associate a Hilbert space HA to each system A; 2) compose two systems by the tensor product rule HAB = HAxHB; 3) associate a transformation from system A to B to a quantum operation, i.e. to a completely positive trace-non-increasing map between the trace-class operators of A and B; 4) (Born rule) evaluate all joint probabilities through that of a special type of quantum operation: the state preparation. I then conclude that quantum paradoxes-such as the Schroedinger-cat's, and, most relevantly, the information paradox-are originated only by the dogma of purification ontology, and they are no longer paradoxes of the theory in the minimal formulation. For the same reason, most interpretations of the theory (e.g. many-world, relational, Darwinism, transactional, von Neumann-Wigner, time-symmetric, ...) interpret the same dogma, not the strict theory stripped of the spurious postulates.
