Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Relative compatibility in conventional quantum mechanics

  • Published:
Foundations of Physics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The notion of relative compability is introduced, according to which compatibility is construed as relative to individual quantum states. The compatibility domain of two observablesA, B is defined to be the set com(A, B) of states relative to whichA andB are compatible. Three basic categories of relative compatibility are then defined according to the character of com(A, B): absolute compatibility (ordinary compatibility), absolute incompatibility, and partial compatibility. Then com(A, B) is seen to be a subspace of Hilbert space invariant underA andB; being a subspace, it corresponds to a quantum binary observable (projection), denotedc(A, B). IfA andB are themselves binary observables, thenc(A, B) is expressible as a quantum logical compound ofA andB using the lattice operations meet, join, and orthocomplement. This suggests extending the notion of relative compatibility to the theory of orthomodular lattices, as well as to more general lattice-theoretic formulations of quantum mechanics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. J. von Neumann,Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1955).

    Google Scholar 

  2. J. L. Park and H. Margenau,Int. J. Theoret. Phys. 1, 205 (1968).

    Google Scholar 

  3. V. S. Varadarajan,Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 15, 189 (1962).

    Google Scholar 

  4. J. M. Jauch,Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1968).

    Google Scholar 

  5. H. Reichenbach,Philosophic Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (U. Cal. Press, Berkeley, 1946).

    Google Scholar 

  6. B. van Fraassen, inBoston Studies in the Philosophy of Science XIII, Cohen and Wartofsky, eds. (D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1974), p. 224.

    Google Scholar 

  7. P. Halmos,Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 144, 381 (1969).

    Google Scholar 

  8. S. P. Holland, inTrends in Lattice Theory, Abbott, ed. (van Nostrand, New York, 1970).

    Google Scholar 

  9. D. M. Topping,Lectures on von Neumann Algebras (van Nostrand, New York, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  10. P. A. Fillmore,Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 16, 648 (1965).

    Google Scholar 

  11. A. Lenard,J. Functional Analysis 10, 410 (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  12. G. M. Hardegree, Relative Compatibility in Orthomodular Lattices, to appear.

  13. G. M. Hardegree, Relative Compatibility and the Lattice Approach to Quantum Mechanics, to appear.

  14. C. R. Putnam,Commutation Properties of Hilbert Space Operators and Related Topics (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1967).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Gary M. Hardegree

    Present address: Department of Philosophy, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of History and Philosophy of Science, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana

    Gary M. Hardegree

Authors
  1. Gary M. Hardegree
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hardegree, G.M. Relative compatibility in conventional quantum mechanics. Found Phys 7, 495–510 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00708865

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00708865

Keywords

Search

Navigation