The Born Rule in Quantum and Classical Mechanics Paul Brumer and Jiangbin Gong Chemical Physics Theory Group and Center for Quantum Information and Quantum Control University of Toronto, Toronto, M5S 3H6, Canada (Dated: January 17, 2006) Considerable effort has been devoted to deriving the Born rule (e.g. that |ψ(x)|2dx is the proba- bility of finding a system, described by ψ, between x and x + dx) in quantum mechanics. Here we show that the Born rule is not solely quantum mechanical; rather, it arises naturally in the Hilbert space formulation of classical mechanics as well. These results provide new insights into the nature of the Born rule, and impact on its understanding in the framework of quantum mechanics. PACS numbers: 03.65.Sq, 03.65.Ca I. INTRODUCTION probabilities or expectation values of observables. The Born rule is not expected to violate any future The Born rule [1] postulates a connection between de- experiments. In this sense, even a strict derivation of the terministic quantum mechanics in a Hilbert space formal- Born rule will not help predict any experimentally new ism with probabilistic predictions of measurement out- physics. However, understanding the origin of the Born comes. It is typically stated [2] as follows (without con- rule is important for isolating this postulate from other sidering degeneracies): if an observable Oˆ, with eigen- concepts in quantum mechanics and for understanding states {|Oii} and spectrum {Oi}, is measured on a sys- what is truly unique in quantum mechanics as compared tem described by the state vector |ψi, the probability with the classical physics. For example, based on the for the measurement to yield the value Oi is given by above-mentioned efforts to derive the Born rule [2, 4, 6, 2 9, 10, 11], it seems now clear that the physical origin of |hOi|ψi| . Alternatively, in the density matrix formula- tion used below, this rule states that the probability is Born’s rule is unrelated to the details (e.g., wavefunction collapse) of quantum measurement processes. T r [ρψρOi ], where ρψ = |ψihψ| and ρOi = |OiihOi|. Most familiar is the textbook example that the probability of The main purpose of this work is to show that Born’s observing a system that is in a state ψ in the coordinate rule is not solely quantum mechanical and that it arises range x to x + dx is given by |hx|ψi|2dx. Born’s rule ap- naturally in the Hilbert space formulation of classical me- pears as a fundamental postulate in quantum mechanics chanics. As such, the Born rule connecting probabilities and is thus far in agreement with experiment. Hence, with eigenvalues and eigenfunctions is not as “quantum” there is intense interest in providing an underlying moti- as it sounds. Indeed, quantum-classical correspondence, vation for, or derivation of, this rule. which played no role in Born’s original considerations Gleason’s theorem [3], for example, provides a formal [1, 12], can then be arguably regarded as an interest- motivation of the Born rule, but it is a purely mathe- ing motivation for the Born rule in quantum mechanics. matical result about vectors in Hilbert spaces and does Similarly, exposing the Born rule in classical mechanics arXiv:quant-ph/0604178v1 24 Apr 2006 not provide insight into the physics of this postulate. should stimulate new routes to understanding the phys- For this reason there have been several attempts to pro- ical origin of this rule in quantum mechanics. In partic- vide a physical derivation of the Born rule. For example, ular, new and interesting questions can be asked in con- Deutsch showed the possibility of deriving the Born rule nection with the previous derivations of the Born rule. from “the non-probabilistic axioms of quantum theory” To demonstrate that the Born rule exists in both quan- and “the non-probabilistic part of classical decision the- tum and classical mechanics we: (1) recall that both ory” [4]. Deutsch’s approach was criticized by Barnum et quantum and classical mechanics can be formulated in al. [5] but was recently reinforced by Saunders [6]. Han- the Hilbert space of density operators [13, 14, 15, 16, 17, son [7] and Wallace [8] analyzed the connection between 18], that the quantum and classical systems are repre- possible derivations of the Born rule and Everett’s many sented by vectors ρ and ρc, respectively, in that Hilbert worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. Zurek re- space, and that ρ and ρc can be expanded in eigen- cently proposed a significantly new approach, the so- states of a set of commuting quantum and classical su- called “envariance” approach [9], for deriving the Born peroperators, respectively; and show (2) that the quan- rule from within quantum mechanics. This approach, to- tum mechanical Born rule can be expressed in terms of tally different from Deutsch’s method, was recently ana- the expansion coefficient of a given density associated lyzed in detail by Schlosshauer and Fine [2] and by Zurek with eigendistributions of a set of superoperators in the [10]. Zurek’s “envariance” approach has also been ana- Hilbert space of density matrix; and (3) that the classi- lyzed and modified by Barnum [11]. All these studies cal interpretation of the phase space representation of ρc have attracted considerable interest in deriving Born’s as a probability density allows the extraction of Born’s rule by making some basic assumptions about quantum rule in classical mechanics, and gives exactly the same 2 ′ structure as the quantum mechanical Born rule. Consider now the quantum probability PQ(K ) of find- These results suggest that the quantum mechanical ˆ ′ ing the quantum observables Ki with eigenvalues Ki, Born rule not only applies to cases of large quantum i = 1, 2, · · · ,N, given that the system is in state ρ. We numbers, but also has a well-defined purely classical show here that the Born rule is then equivalent to the ′ limit. Hence, independent of other subtle elements of the statement that PQ(K ) must be proportional to the ex- quantum theory, the inherent consistency with the clas- pansion coefficient DK′,0 of the given density ρ associ- sical Born rule for the macroscopic world imposes an im- ated with the common eigendistribution ρK′,0 of superop- portant condition on any eigenvalue-eigenfunction based 1 ˆ ′ erators 2 [Ki, ]+ with eigenvalues Ki and of superopera- probability rule in quantum mechanics. 1 ˆ tors h¯ [Ki, ] with eigenvalue zero. To see this, consider first a quantum density for a pure quantum state, e.g., II. THE QUANTUM MECHANICAL BORN ρ = |ψihψ| (the extension to mixed states is straightfor- RULE IN DENSITY MATRIX FORMALISM ward). Then the Born rule gives that ′ ′ 2 ′ ′ PQ(K ) = |hψ|K i| = T r [|K ihK ||ψihψ|] Consider first quantum mechanics in the Hilbert space = T r [|K′ihK′|ρ] , (5) of the density matrix [16, 17]. Given an operator Oˆ ≡ KˆN for a system of N degrees of freedom, we first consider where |K′i is a common and normalized eigenfunction of the (classically) integrable case where there exist N in- operators Kˆi, i =1, 2, · · · ,N. However, dependent and commuting observables Kˆi, i =1, · · · ,N. Another extreme, the chaotic case, will be discussed 1 ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ [Kˆ , |K ihK |]+ = K |K ihK |; [Kˆ , |K ihK |]=0, (6) in Sec. IV. For convenience we also assume that the 2 i i i Kˆi, i = 1, 2, · · · ,N, have a discrete spectrum, but the ′ ′ central result below applies to cases with a continuous so that |K ihK | is seen to be the common eigendistribu- 1 ˆ ′ spectrum as well. The complete set of commuting su- tion of superoperators 2 [Ki, ]+ with eigenvalues Ki and peroperators in the quantum Hilbert space can be con- 1 ˆ of superoperators h¯ [Ki, ] with eigenvalue zero. That is, structed as ′ ′ 1 1 |K ihK | = ρK′,0. (7) [Kˆi, ], [Kˆi, ]+, (i =1, 2, · · · ,N), (1) ¯h 2 Equations (4), (5), and (7) then lead to where [, ] denotes the commutator and [, ]+ denotes the ′ ′ anticommutator, i.e., [A,ˆ Bˆ]= AˆBˆ−BˆAˆ, [A,ˆ Bˆ]+ = AˆBˆ+ PQ(K )= DK ,0. (8) ˆ ˆ BA. The simultaneous eigendensities of the complete set Equation (8) is a general restatement of the quantum me- of superoperators are denoted ρα,β. That is, chanical Born rule based on the Hilbert space structure 1 of density matrix. [Kˆ ,ρ ]+ = α ρ ; 2 i α,β i α,β Note that the multidimensional result of Eq. (5) has 1 carefully accounted for possible degeneracies associated Kˆi,ρα,β = βiρα,β, (2) ′ ′ with KN . That is, the total probability of observing KN ¯h h i ′ would be obtained by summing PQ(K ) with all possi- where α ≡ (α1, α2, · · · , αN ) is the collection of eigenval- ble K′, i = 1, 2, · · · , (N − 1), a necessary procedure not 1 ˆ i ues associated with 2 [Ki, ]+, and β ≡ (β1,β2, · · · ,βN ) explicitly stated in Born’s rule. 1 ˆ is the collection of eigenvalues associated with h¯ [Ki, ]. The state of the quantum system is described by an arbitrary density matrix ρ in the Hilbert space under III. THE BORN RULE IN CLASSICAL consideration, and can be expanded in terms of the basis MECHANICS states ρα,β as Consider now classical mechanics. The mechanics ρ = Dα,βρα,β, (3) has numerous equivalent formulations, such as New- Xα,β ton’s Laws, the Lagrangian or Hamiltonian formulations, where the sum is over all eigendensities. The sum should Hamilton-Jacobi theory, etc. The less familiar Hilbert be understood as an integral if the spectrum is contin- space formulation of classical mechanics used below was uous.