The Unreasonable Success of Quantum Probability I: Quantum Measurements as Uniform Fluctuations

We introduce a 'uniform tension-reduction' (UTR) model, which allows to represent the probabilities associated with an arbitrary measurement situation and use it to explain the emergence of quantum probabilities (the Born rule) as 'uniform' fluctuations on this measurement situation. The model exploits the geometry of simplexes to represent the states, in a way that the measurement probabilities can be derived as the 'Lebesgue measure' of suitably defined convex subregions of the simplexes. We consider a very simple and evocative physical realization of the abstract model, using a material point particle which is acted upon by elastic membranes, which by breaking and collapsing produce the different possible outcomes. This easy to visualize mechanical realization allows one to gain considerable insight into the possible hidden structure of an arbitrary measurement process. We also show that the UTR-model can be further generalized into a 'general tension-reduction' (GTR) model, describing conditions of lack of knowledge generated by 'non-uniform' fluctuations. In this ampler framework, particularly suitable to describe experiments in cognitive science, we define and motivate a notion of 'universal measurement', describing the most general possible condition of lack of knowledge in a measurement, emphasizing that the uniform fluctuations characterizing quantum measurements can also be understood as an average over all possible forms of non-uniform fluctuations which can be actualized in a measurement context. This means that the Born rule of quantum mechanics can be understood as a first order approximation of a more general non-uniform theory, thus explaining part of the great success of quantum probability in the description of different domains of reality. This is the first part of a two-part article.

[1]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum, classical and intermediate: An illustrative example , 1994 .

[2]  Shu Li,et al.  A test of "reason-based" and "reluctance-to-think" accounts of the disjunction effect , 2012, Inf. Sci..

[3]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The entity and modern physics: the creation-discovery- view of reality 1 , 1998 .

[4]  Shmuel Zamir,et al.  Type Indeterminacy-A Model of the KT-man ( Kahneman Tversky ) , 2003 .

[5]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The Violation of Bell Inequalities in the Macroworld , 2000, quant-ph/0007044.

[6]  J. Busemeyer,et al.  A quantum probability explanation for violations of ‘rational’ decision theory , 2009, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[7]  A. Tversky,et al.  Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: the conjunction fallacy in probability judgment , 1983 .

[8]  J. Hampton Overextension of Conjunctive Concepts: Evidence for a Unitary Model of Concept Typicality and Class Inclusion , 1988 .

[9]  R. Morrow,et al.  Foundations of Quantum Mechanics , 1968 .

[10]  J. Neumann,et al.  Theory of games and economic behavior , 1945, 100 Years of Math Milestones.

[11]  Harald Atmanspacher,et al.  Epistemic Entanglement due to Non-generating Partitions of Classical Dynamical Systems , 2012, 1204.5454.

[12]  J. Neumann,et al.  The Logic of Quantum Mechanics , 1936 .

[13]  Peter Bruza,et al.  Entangling words and meaning , 2008 .

[14]  B. Coecke Generalization of the proof on the existence of hidden measurements to experiments with an infinite set of outcomes , 1995 .

[15]  H. Atmanspacher,et al.  Complementarity in Classical Dynamical Systems , 2006 .

[16]  C. Piron,et al.  On the Foundations of Quantum Physics , 1976 .

[17]  J. Hampton,et al.  Disjunction of natural concepts , 1988, Memory & cognition.

[18]  C. J. van Rijsbergen,et al.  The geometry of information retrieval , 2004 .

[19]  M. Allais Le comportement de l'homme rationnel devant le risque : critique des postulats et axiomes de l'ecole americaine , 1953 .

[20]  O. Lévêque,et al.  Classical and Quantum Probability in the ∈-Model , 1999 .

[21]  Diederik Aerts Quantum structures: An attempt to explain the origin of their appearance in nature , 1995 .

[22]  A. Gatti,et al.  Quantum Structures , 1998, Technical Digest. 1998 EQEC. European Quantum Electronics Conference (Cat. No.98TH8326).

[23]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum structures in macroscopic reality , 1993 .

[24]  D. A. Edwards The mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics , 1979, Synthese.

[25]  James T. Townsend,et al.  Quantum dynamics of human decision-making , 2006 .

[26]  M. S. D. Bianchi God May Not Play Dice, But Human Observers Surely Do , 2012, 1208.0674.

[27]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum, classical and intermediate I: a model on the Poincaré sphere , 1997 .

[28]  Jennifer S Trueblood,et al.  A quantum theoretical explanation for probability judgment errors. , 2011, Psychological review.

[29]  Sandro Sozzo,et al.  A Quantum Probability Explanation in Fock Space for Borderline Contradictions , 2013, 1311.6050.

[30]  Donald A. Sofge,et al.  Quantum Interaction: Proceedings of the Second Quantum Interaction Symposium - Qi-2008 , 2008 .

[31]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The extended Bloch representation of quantum mechanics and the hidden-measurement solution to the measurement problem , 2014, 1404.2429.

[32]  Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi,et al.  Using simple elastic bands to explain quantum mechanics: a conceptual review of two of Aerts’ machine-models , 2011, 1112.4045.

[33]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  A theory of concepts and their combinations I: The structure of the sets of contexts and properties , 2005 .

[34]  Kirsty Kitto,et al.  Why Quantum Theory , 2008 .

[35]  J. Schreiber Foundations Of Statistics , 2016 .

[36]  Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi,et al.  The δ-Quantum Machine, the k-Model, and the Non-ordinary Spatiality of Quantum Entities , 2011, 1104.4738.

[37]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Example of a macroscopical classical situation that violates Bell inequalities , 1982 .

[38]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Foundations of Quantum Physics: A General Realistic and Operational Approach , 2001, quant-ph/0105109.

[39]  G. Carpenter,et al.  Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 1999 .

[40]  Reinhard Blutner,et al.  Concepts and bounded rationality: An application of Niestegge's approach to conditional quantum probabilities , 2009 .

[41]  D. Ellsberg Decision, probability, and utility: Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms , 1961 .

[42]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  A Model with Varying Fluctuations in the Measurement Context , 1997 .

[43]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Applications of Quantum Statistics in Psychological Studies of Decision Processes , 1995 .

[44]  C. H. Randall,et al.  MANUALS, MORPHISMS AND QUANTUM MECHANICS , 1978 .

[45]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum Structure in Cognition: Why and How Concepts Are Entangled , 2011, QI.

[46]  Jerome R. Busemeyer,et al.  Quantum Models of Cognition and Decision , 2012 .

[47]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  On the Origin of Probabilities in Quantum Mechanics: Creative and Contextual Aspects , 1999 .

[48]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  Ubiquitous Quantum Structure: From Psychology to Finance , 2010 .

[49]  Harald Atmanspacher,et al.  The Potential of Using Quantum Theory to Build Models of Cognition , 2013, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[50]  J. Busemeyer,et al.  Introduction to the special issue on quantum cognition , 2009, 1309.5673.

[51]  A. Tversky,et al.  The Disjunction Effect in Choice under Uncertainty , 1992 .

[52]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  A mechanistic classical laboratory situation violating the Bell inequalities with 2-2 , 1991 .

[53]  Diederik Aerts The stuff the world is made of: physics and reality , 1999 .

[54]  J. Bertrand Calcul Des Probabilites , 2005 .

[55]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The unreasonable success of quantum probability II: Quantum measurements as universal measurements , 2014, Journal of Mathematical Psychology.

[56]  E. Wigner The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences (reprint) , 1960 .

[57]  Emmanuel Haven,et al.  Quantum mechanics and violations of the sure-thing principle: The use of probability interference and other concepts , 2009 .

[58]  Didier Sornette,et al.  Decision theory with prospect interference and entanglement , 2011, ArXiv.

[59]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum Structure in Cognition , 2008, 0805.3850.

[60]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Contextualizing concepts using a mathematical generalization of the quantum formalism , 2002, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[61]  Peter Bruza,et al.  Extracting Spooky-Activation-at-a-Distance from Considerations of Entanglement , 2009, QI.

[62]  Dirk Aerts,et al.  A possible explanation for the probabilities of quantum mechanics , 1986 .

[63]  A. Khrennikov,et al.  Quantum Social Science , 2013 .

[64]  T. Durt,et al.  Quantum structures in macroscopical reality , 2001 .

[65]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Entanglement of Conceptual Entities in Quantum Model Theory (QMod) , 2012, QI.

[66]  Emmanuel M. Pothos,et al.  A Quantum Probability Perspective on Borderline Vagueness , 2013, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[67]  Dirk Aerts,et al.  Description of many separated physical entities without the paradoxes encountered in quantum mechanics , 1982 .

[68]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Solving the hard problem of Bertrand's paradox , 2014, 1403.4139.

[69]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Concepts and Their Dynamics: A Quantum-Theoretic Modeling of Human Thought , 2012, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[70]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Mechanistic classical laboratory situation with a quantum logic structure , 1992 .

[71]  Riccardo Franco,et al.  Risk, ambiguity and quantum decision theory , 2007, 0711.0886.

[72]  S. Peters,et al.  Word Vectors and Quantum Logic Experiments with negation and disjunction , 2003 .

[73]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum structure and human thought. , 2013, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[74]  Shmuel Zamir,et al.  Type Indeterminacy: A Model for the KT(Kahneman-Tversky)-Man , 2006, physics/0604166.

[75]  Riccardo Franco,et al.  The conjunction fallacy and interference effects , 2007, 0708.3948.

[76]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  A Theory of Concepts and Their Combinations II: A Hilbert Space Representation , 2004 .

[77]  Harald Atmanspacher,et al.  Extending the Philosophical Significance of the Idea of Complementarity , 2009 .

[78]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum Model Theory (QMod): Modeling Contextual Emergent Entangled Interfering Entities , 2012, QI.

[79]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum structures, separated physical entities and probability , 1994 .