Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T04:32:14.265Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Matter of Degree: Putting Unitary Inequivalence to Work

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Laura Ruetsche
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

If a classical system has infinitely many degrees of freedom, its Hamiltonian quantization need not be unique up to unitary equivalence. I sketch different approaches (Hilbert space and algebraic) to understanding the content of quantum theories in light of this non-uniqueness, and suggest that neither approach suffices to support explanatory aspirations encountered in the thermodynamic limit of quantum statistical mechanics.

Type
Quantum Field Theory, Bell's Theorem, and Hidden Variables
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 70 , Issue 5: Proceedings of the 2002 Biennial Meeting of The Philosophy of Science Association. Part I: Contributed Papers , December 2003 , pp. 1329 - 1342
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

For comments on earlier drafts, I am obliged to Gordon Belot, Jeremy Butterfield, Rob Clifton, and John Earman.

References

Bratteli, Ola, and Robinson, Derek W. (1987), Operator Algebras and Quantum Statistical Mechanics 1, 2nd ed. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bratteli, Ola, and Robinson, Derek W. (1997), Operator Algebras and Quantum Statistical Mechanics 2, 2nd ed. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callender, Craig (2001), “Taking Thermodynamics Too Seriously”, Taking Thermodynamics Too Seriously 32:539–554.Google Scholar
Clifton, Rob, and Halvorson, Hans (2001), “Are Rindler Quanta Real?”, Are Rindler Quanta Real? 52:417–470.Google Scholar
Emch, Gerard G. (1984), Mathematical and Conceptual Foundations of Twentieth Century Physics. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Emch, Gerard G., and Knops, H.J.F. (1970), “Pure thermodynamic phases as extremal KMS states”, Pure thermodynamic phases as extremal KMS states 11:3008–3018.Google Scholar
Kadison, Richard (1965), “Transformations of States in Operator Theory and Dynamics”, Transformations of States in Operator Theory and Dynamics 3, Suppl. 2:177–198.Google Scholar
Haag, Rudolf (1962), “The Mathematical Structure of the Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer Model”, The Mathematical Structure of the Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer Model 25:287–299.Google Scholar
Kronz, Fred, and Lupher, Tracy (2001), “Unitarily Inequivalent Representations in Algebraic Quantum Theory”, pre-print.Google Scholar
Primas, Hans (1983), Chemistry, Quantum Mechanics, and Reductionism. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, Derek W. (1966), “Algebraic Aspects of Relativistic Quantum Field Theory”, in Chretien, M. and Deser, S. (eds.), Axiomatic Field Theory. New York: Gordon and Breach.Google Scholar
Ruelle, David (1969), Statistical Mechanics. New York: W.A. Benjamin.Google Scholar
Segal, Irving (1967), “Representation of Canonical Commutation Relations”, in Lurçat, François (ed.), Cargese Lectures in Theoretical Physics. New York: Gordon and Breach.Google Scholar
Sewell, Geoffrey L. (1986), Quantum Theory of Collective Phenomena. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wald, Robert M. (1994), Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime and Black Hole Thermodynamics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar