RECORD
Classical system boundaries cannot be determined within quantum Darwinism
Quantum Physics · Submitted 2 Aug 2010
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim Quantum Darwinism cannot, therefore, be regarded as providing a purely quantum-mechanical explanation of the "emergence" of classicality.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
Multiple observers who interact with environmental encodings of the states of a macroscopic quantum system S as required by quantum Darwinism cannot demonstrate that they are jointly observing S without a joint a priori assumption of a classical boundary separating S from its environment E. Quantum Darwinism cannot, therefore, be regarded as providing a purely quantum-mechanical explanation of the "emergence" of classicality.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | Multiple observers who interact with environmental encodings of the states of a macroscopic quantum system S as required by quantum Darwinism cannot demonstrate that they are jointly observing S without a joint a priori assumption of a classical boundary separating S from its environment E. | result 0.97 | 0.38 | 0.47 | asserted 1.00 |
| s1 | Quantum Darwinism cannot, therefore, be regarded as providing a purely quantum-mechanical explanation of the "emergence" of classicality. | interpretation 0.98 | 0.54 | 0.89 | asserted 0.98 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v4
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
Multiple observers who interact with environmental encodings of the states of a macroscopic quantum system S as required by quantum Darwinism cannot demonstrate that they are jointly observing S without a joint a priori assumption of a classical boundary separating S from its environment E. Quantum Darwinism cannot, therefore, be regarded as providing a purely quantum-mechanical explanation of the "emergence" of classicality.
Human review
How the literature uses it
7 arXiv papers cite this in 14 sentences
Papers citing it · 6 sentences without a confident label
Contests it 1 paper
-
“A property of a physical system is objective when it is: =2em * 1. simultaneously accessible to many observers, * 2. who are able to find out what it is without prior knowledge about the system of interest, and * 3. who can arrive at a consensus about it without prior agreement.” (p. 1 of [ref] ; p. 3 of [ref] ) On the very reasonable assumption that knowing how to identify the system of interest counts as having knowledge about it - exactly what kind of knowledge is discussed in detail below - this definition is clearly circular: each observer must have “prior knowledge” to even begin her observations, and the observers must have a “prior agreement” that they are observing the same thing to arrive at a consensus about its properties [ref] .
If physics is an information science, what is an observer? · Informational Requirements for System Identification · contest 0.79
Cites it as support 5 papers
-
It has been shown, however, that this cannot be done within the confines of quantum theory [ref] .
On the Ollivier-Poulin-Zurek definition of objectivity · Option 2: `$𝐒$' is a definite description · 1.00
-
Hence the boundaries of distant systems can never be determined by a quantum Darwinist observer; such an observer can assume separability, but this assumption has no operational meaning unless the observer invokes Zurek's “axiom(o)” to declare that each local encoding that is encountered is an encoding of some property of a particular re-identifiable bounded thing [ref] .
Autonomy all the way down: Systems and dynamics in quantum Bayesianism · What is a QBist “observer”? · 0.97
-
It has previously been shown that the dynamics of system-environment decoherence, even when combined with environmental “witnessing” and encoding of quantum states [ref] , is insufficient to unambiguously specify the boundaries of macroscopic systems that are regarded by observers as classical [ref] .
Consistent quantum mechanics admits no mereotopology · Introduction · 0.96
What it cites · 12 sentences without a confident label
Cites as background 3 papers
-
The QD program has three components: (1) einselection of a pointer basis for any system of interest $𝒮$ by decohering interactions with the surrounding environment $ℰ$ [ref] ; (2) “witnessing” of the eigenstates of $𝒮$ in the einselected pointer basis by states of $ℰ$ [ref] ; and (3) redundant encoding of the environmentally-witnessed eigenstates of $𝒮$ in multiple, disjoint fragments of $ℰ$ that are accessible to multiple independent observers [ref] .
Objective properties from subjective quantum states: Environment as a witness · Introduction · 0.95
-
The QD program has three components: (1) einselection of a pointer basis for any system of interest $𝒮$ by decohering interactions with the surrounding environment $ℰ$ [ref] ; (2) “witnessing” of the eigenstates of $𝒮$ in the einselected pointer basis by states of $ℰ$ [ref] ; and (3) redundant encoding of the environmentally-witnessed eigenstates of $𝒮$ in multiple, disjoint fragments of $ℰ$ that are accessible to multiple independent observers [ref] .
Environment as a Witness: Selective Proliferation of Information and Emergence of Objectivity in a Quantum Universe · Introduction · 0.95
-
The QD program has three components: (1) einselection of a pointer basis for any system of interest $𝒮$ by decohering interactions with the surrounding environment $ℰ$ [ref] ; (2) “witnessing” of the eigenstates of $𝒮$ in the einselected pointer basis by states of $ℰ$ [ref] ; and (3) redundant encoding of the environmentally-witnessed eigenstates of $𝒮$ in multiple, disjoint fragments of $ℰ$ that are accessible to multiple independent observers [ref] .
Quantum Darwinism: Entanglement, branches, and the emergent classicality of redundantly stored quantum information · Introduction · 0.95
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.