pith. sign in

arxiv: 2506.23684 · v1 · submitted 2025-06-30 · 🪐 quant-ph

An Exact Five-Step Method for Classicalizing N-level Quantum Systems: Application to Quantum Entanglement Dynamics

Daniel Mart\'inez-Gil , Pedro Bargue\~no , Salvador Miret-Art\'es This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 08:00 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords classicalizationcomplex projective spacesymplectic structureentanglement dynamicsN-level systemsHamilton equationsquantum-classical correspondence
0
0 comments X

The pith

Any N-level quantum system can be exactly turned into classical Hamiltonian dynamics on projective space that replicates all quantum features including entanglement.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper develops a five-step procedure that converts the Schrödinger evolution of an arbitrary N-level quantum system into a set of classical equations. It uses the geometry of complex projective space to define both a Hamiltonian function and the Poisson brackets that generate the motion. The resulting N-1 Hamilton equations reproduce the exact time dependence of quantum probabilities and entanglement measures. A reader should care because the construction works without approximations or limits on N, offering a precise classical counterpart to the full quantum dynamics.

Core claim

The authors present an exact five-step algorithmic method that, starting from the quantum Hamiltonian, constructs a classical Hamiltonian and equips the complex projective space CP^{N-1} with a symplectic structure so that the Poisson-bracket equations of motion are mathematically identical to the quantum Schrödinger equation. For two interacting qubits this procedure recovers the exact quantum probabilities, population differences, and concurrence, thereby capturing entanglement evolution through purely classical trajectories.

What carries the argument

The symplectic geometry of the complex projective space CP^{N-1}, which supplies the Poisson brackets that, together with a derived classical Hamiltonian, generate N-1 equations whose solutions match the quantum time evolution.

If this is right

  • The procedure yields precisely N-1 classical equations for any N-level system.
  • Quantum observables such as probabilities and concurrence become functions on the classical phase space.
  • Entanglement dynamics appears as ordinary classical evolution under the constructed Hamiltonian.
  • The method applies to arbitrary N without restrictions or perturbative approximations.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Classical simulation tools could be applied directly to quantum problems once the Hamiltonian is obtained.
  • Entanglement might be reinterpreted as a classical correlation in the higher-dimensional phase space of CP^{N-1}.
  • The same five-step construction could be tested on open quantum systems by adding dissipative terms to the classical Hamiltonian.

Load-bearing premise

The geometry of complex projective space supplies a symplectic structure whose Poisson brackets, when paired with a suitably derived classical Hamiltonian, produce equations whose solutions exactly match the quantum Schrödinger evolution for any N without approximations.

What would settle it

For the two-qubit example, integrate the derived classical Hamilton equations and check whether the resulting classical trajectories reproduce the exact time-dependent concurrence and state probabilities obtained from the Schrödinger equation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.23684 by Daniel Mart\'inez-Gil, Pedro Bargue\~no, Salvador Miret-Art\'es.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Time dependent amplitudes together with their classical counterparts, considering [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Time dependent quaternionic population difference, considering [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Time dependent concurrence. We have considered [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: In the left panel, we plot the time dependent amplitudes, while in the right one, we consider the time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In this manuscript, we present a general and exact method for classicalizing the dynamics of any $N$-level quantum system, transforming quantum evolution into a classical-like framework using the geometry of complex projective spaces $\mathbb{CP}^{N-1}$. The method can be expressed as five-step algorithmic procedure to derive a classical Hamiltonian and a symplectic structure for the Poisson brackets, yielding $N-1$ Hamilton's equations that precisely replicate the quantum dynamics, including complex phenomena like entanglement. We demonstrate the method's efficacy by classicalizing two interacting qubits in $\mathbb{CP}^3$, exactly reproducing quantum observables such as quantum probabilities, quaternionic population differences and the concurrence, capturing entanglement dynamics via a classical analog.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims to introduce an exact five-step algorithmic procedure that classicalizes the dynamics of any N-level quantum system by leveraging the geometry of complex projective space CP^{N-1}. It derives a classical Hamiltonian and equips the space with a symplectic structure whose Poisson brackets yield N-1 Hamilton's equations that exactly replicate the quantum Schrödinger evolution, including observables and entanglement measures such as concurrence. The method is demonstrated on two interacting qubits in CP^3, where it is asserted to reproduce quantum probabilities, quaternionic population differences, and entanglement dynamics without approximations.

Significance. If the central claim of exact, approximation-free replication holds for arbitrary N and general Hamiltonians, the work would provide a geometrically grounded classical framework for quantum dynamics and entanglement, potentially enabling new classical simulation techniques or interpretive tools. The explicit algorithmic presentation and application to a two-qubit entangled system are strengths that could facilitate verification and extension if the derivations are made fully explicit.

major comments (2)
  1. [Method section (five-step procedure)] The abstract and method description assert that the five-step procedure yields Hamilton's equations whose solutions match the projected Schrödinger equation identically, but no explicit derivation is supplied showing how the classical Hamiltonian is obtained from the quantum operator or how the Fubini-Study symplectic form on CP^{N-1} produces Poisson brackets that enforce this equivalence for general Hermitian operators and arbitrary initial states (including entangled ones).
  2. [Application to two qubits in CP^3] In the two-qubit demonstration, while reproduction of concurrence and other observables is claimed, there is no error analysis, comparison of trajectories, or verification that the N-1 equations remain exact when the state evolves through regions where coordinate charts on CP^3 may introduce singularities or normalization constraints.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Method section] Notation for the symplectic structure and Poisson brackets should be defined with explicit coordinate expressions in at least one chart to allow direct checking of the bracket algebra.
  2. [Method section] The manuscript would benefit from a short table or pseudocode listing the precise inputs and outputs of each of the five steps.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and valuable comments on our manuscript. We believe the clarifications and additions we have made address the concerns and strengthen the presentation of our five-step classicalization method.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Method section (five-step procedure)] The abstract and method description assert that the five-step procedure yields Hamilton's equations whose solutions match the projected Schrödinger equation identically, but no explicit derivation is supplied showing how the classical Hamiltonian is obtained from the quantum operator or how the Fubini-Study symplectic form on CP^{N-1} produces Poisson brackets that enforce this equivalence for general Hermitian operators and arbitrary initial states (including entangled ones).

    Authors: We appreciate this comment and agree that the derivation steps could be made more explicit for clarity. In the revised version, we have added a detailed derivation in the Methods section. Specifically, we show how the quantum Hamiltonian H is mapped to a classical function on CP^{N-1} by taking the expectation value in the homogeneous coordinates, adjusted for the projective nature. The Fubini-Study form is used to define the symplectic structure, and we explicitly compute the Poisson brackets to recover the Schrödinger equation i ħ d|ψ>/dt = H |ψ> projected onto the tangent space of CP^{N-1}. This holds for any Hermitian H and any initial state in CP^{N-1}, including those corresponding to entangled states in the two-qubit case. The five-step procedure is now accompanied by these mathematical steps. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Application to two qubits in CP^3] In the two-qubit demonstration, while reproduction of concurrence and other observables is claimed, there is no error analysis, comparison of trajectories, or verification that the N-1 equations remain exact when the state evolves through regions where coordinate charts on CP^3 may introduce singularities or normalization constraints.

    Authors: We thank the referee for pointing this out. Although the equivalence is exact by construction of the symplectic structure, which preserves the norm and avoids singularities through the use of multiple charts, we have revised the application section to include explicit trajectory comparisons between the classical equations and the quantum evolution. We added plots demonstrating perfect agreement for probabilities, population differences, and concurrence over time. For coordinate singularities, we explain that the method uses an atlas of charts on CP^3, and the equations are invariant under chart transitions, ensuring exactness throughout the evolution. No error analysis is needed as the match is analytical, but we provide numerical verification for the specific example. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: derivation rests on standard CP^{N-1} geometry and Fubini-Study structure

full rationale

The paper's five-step procedure is presented as an algorithmic extraction of a classical Hamiltonian (via expectation values on the projective manifold) together with the canonical symplectic form on CP^{N-1}. This yields Hamilton's equations whose solutions are asserted to match the projected Schrödinger dynamics identically. Because the symplectic structure and the identification of the Hamiltonian are taken directly from the well-established differential geometry of complex projective space rather than being fitted to or defined in terms of the target quantum observables, no self-definitional reduction, fitted-input-as-prediction, or load-bearing self-citation chain appears. The derivation chain therefore remains independent of the specific N-level dynamics it reproduces.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The approach rests on the geometric properties of CP^{N-1} being compatible with quantum dynamics; no free parameters or new entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The geometry of complex projective space CP^{N-1} admits a symplectic structure whose Poisson brackets can be used to reproduce quantum evolution exactly.
    This premise is required for the five-step procedure to map Schrödinger dynamics onto classical Hamilton equations.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5658 in / 1159 out tokens · 19513 ms · 2026-05-19T08:00:49.524577+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    This approach revealed that quantum evolution could, in principle, be mirrored by classical-like dynamics, serving as a starting point for subsequent developments

    rewrote the Schrödinger equation into a Hamiltonian framework, using the expectation value of the quantum Hamiltonian as a classical function. This approach revealed that quantum evolution could, in principle, be mirrored by classical-like dynamics, serving as a starting point for subsequent developments. In molecular physics, Meyer and Miller [7] pioneer...

    work page

  2. [2]

    An Exact Five-Step Method for Classicalizing N-level Quantum Systems: Application to Quantum Entanglement Dynamics

    and the Stratonovich–Weyl formalism of Runeson and Richardson [11, 12], have extended these ideas to multilevel ∗ daniel.martinez@ua.es † pedro.bargueno@ua.es ‡ s.miret@iff.csic.es arXiv:2506.23684v1 [quant-ph] 30 Jun 2025 systems, often under quasiclassical approximations. On the other hand, geometric perspectives of classicalization can be performed, wh...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  3. [3]

    To define coordinates inCPN −1, we select a non-zero coefficient, sayaN −1, and compute the inhomogeneous coordinates: xi = ai aN −1 for i = 0, 1,

    Obtain coordinates inCPN −1 We begin with a wave function for a system ofN states, expressed in a chosen basis as |ψ⟩ = N −1X i=0 ai |ϕi⟩ , (1) where ai are complex coefficients and|ϕi⟩ are the basis states. To define coordinates inCPN −1, we select a non-zero coefficient, sayaN −1, and compute the inhomogeneous coordinates: xi = ai aN −1 for i = 0, 1, . ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    SinceCPN −1 is a projective space, the overall factoraN −1 does not affect the state’s physical properties, and the dynamics are determined by the coordinates xi

    Express the wave function inCPN −1 coordinates Using these coordinates, the wave function can be rewritten as |ψ⟩ = 1√ N N −2X i=0 xi |ϕi⟩ + |ϕN −1⟩ ! , (3) where N = 1+PN −2 i=0 |xi|2 is the normalization factor in this representation. SinceCPN −1 is a projective space, the overall factoraN −1 does not affect the state’s physical properties, and the dyna...

    work page

  5. [5]

    (4) This scalar functionH0 represents the Hamiltonian governing classical-like dynamics onCPN −1

    Compute the Hamiltonian function The classical-like HamiltonianH0 is obtained by calculating the expectation value of the quantum HamiltonianˆH with respect to|ψ⟩, as H0 = ⟨ψ| ˆH|ψ⟩. (4) This scalar functionH0 represents the Hamiltonian governing classical-like dynamics onCPN −1

    work page

  6. [6]

    (5) From this potential, the Fubini-Study metricgj¯k can be derived as 3 gj¯k = 2 ∂2K ∂xj∂¯xk

    Determine the symplectic form of the space In order to determine the symplectic form ofCPN −1, a quantityK, called Kähler potential, is defined in terms of the normalization factor as follows K = log (N ) . (5) From this potential, the Fubini-Study metricgj¯k can be derived as 3 gj¯k = 2 ∂2K ∂xj∂¯xk . (6) Having defined the metric of the space, we can rel...

    work page

  7. [7]

    Note that, in flat spaces such asR2n, the canonical symplectic form is used, ωjk = 1, yielding the usual Hamilton’s equations dqi dt = ∂H ∂pi , dpi dt = − ∂H ∂qi

    Derive Hamilton’s Equations Finally, the classical dynamics are described by Hamilton’s equations, which can be generally written in terms of Poisson brackets as follows ˙xj = {xj, H0}, (9) where the Poisson bracket can be defined in terms of the inverse of the symplectic form matrix as {f, H } = N −2X j,k=0 ωjk ∂f ∂q j ∂H ∂pk − ∂f ∂pj ∂H ∂q k , (10) bein...

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Altland and B

    A. Altland and B. D. Simons.Condensed Matter Field Theory. Cambridge University Press, 2 edition, 2010

    work page 2010

  9. [9]

    Sachdev.Quantum Phase Transitions

    S. Sachdev.Quantum Phase Transitions. Cambridge University Press, 2 edition, 2011

    work page 2011

  10. [10]

    Many-body physics with ultracold gases

    Immanuel Bloch, Jean Dalibard, and Wilhelm Zwerger. Many-body physics with ultracold gases. Rev. Mod. Phys., 80:885–964, 2008

    work page 2008

  11. [11]

    Nielsen and Isaac L

    Michael A. Nielsen and Isaac L. Chuang.Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Cambridge University Press, 10th anniversary edition edition, 2010

    work page 2010

  12. [12]

    Ostlund.Modern Quantum Chemistry: Introduction to Advanced Electronic Structure Theory

    Attila Szabo and Neil S. Ostlund.Modern Quantum Chemistry: Introduction to Advanced Electronic Structure Theory. Dover Publications, 1996

    work page 1996

  13. [13]

    Strocchi

    F. Strocchi. Complex coordinates and quantum mechanics.Rev. Mod. Phys., 38:36–40, 1966

    work page 1966

  14. [14]

    H. D. Meyer and W. H. Miller. A classical analog for electronic degrees of freedom in nonadiabatic collision processes.J. Chem. Phys., 70:3214–3223, 1979

    work page 1979

  15. [15]

    Stock and M

    G. Stock and M. Thoss. Semiclassical description of nonadiabatic quantum dynamics.Phys. Rev. Lett., 78:578–581, 1997

    work page 1997

  16. [16]

    J. C. Tully. Molecular dynamics with electronic transitions.J. Chem. Phys., 93:1061–1071, 1990

    work page 1990

  17. [17]

    S. J. Cotton and W. H. Miller. A symmetrical quasi-classical spin-mapping model for the electronic degrees of freedom in non-adiabatic processes. The Journal of Physical Chemistry A, 119:12138–12145, 2015

    work page 2015

  18. [18]

    J. E. Runeson and J. O. Richardson. Spin-mapping approach for nonadiabatic molecular dynamics. J. Chem. Phys., 151:044119, 2019

    work page 2019

  19. [19]

    J. E. Runeson and J. O. Richardson. Generalized spin mapping for quantum-classical dynamics. J. Chem. Phys., 152:084110, 2020

    work page 2020

  20. [20]

    Geometrization of quantum mechanics.Commun.Math

    Kibble T.W.B. Geometrization of quantum mechanics.Commun.Math. Phys, 65:189–201, 1979

    work page 1979

  21. [21]

    G.W. Gibbons. Typical states and density matrices.Journal of Geometry and Physics, 8(1):147–162, 1992

    work page 1992

  22. [22]

    Ashtekar and T

    A. Ashtekar and T. A. Schilling.Geometrical Formulation of Quantum Mechanics, pages 23–65. Springer New York, New York, NY, 1999

    work page 1999

  23. [23]

    D. C. Brody and L. P. Hughston. Geometric quantum mechanics.Journal of Geometry and Physics, 38(1):19–53, 2001

    work page 2001

  24. [24]

    Bengtsson and K

    I. Bengtsson and K. Zyczkowski.Geometry of Quantum States: An Introduction to Quantum Entanglement. Cambridge University Press, 2006

    work page 2006

  25. [25]

    Moroianu

    A. Moroianu. Lectures on Kähler Geometry. London Mathematical Society Student Texts. Cambridge University Press, 2007

    work page 2007

  26. [26]

    Ballmann.Lectures on Kähler Manifolds

    W. Ballmann.Lectures on Kähler Manifolds. European Mathematical Society, 2006

    work page 2006

  27. [27]

    Nakahara.Geometry, Topology and Physics

    M. Nakahara.Geometry, Topology and Physics. CRC Press, 2003

    work page 2003

  28. [28]

    G. Fubini. Sulle metriche definite da una forma hermitiana.Atti Instituto Veneto, 6:501, 1903

    work page 1903

  29. [29]

    E. Study. Kürzeste wege in komplexen gebiet.Math. Annalen, 60:321, 1905

    work page 1905

  30. [30]

    V.I. Arnold. Symplectic geometry and topology.J. Math. Phys., 41(6):3307–3343, 2000

    work page 2000

  31. [31]

    Introduction to Smooth Manifolds

    J.M.Lee. Introduction to Smooth Manifolds. Springer New York, NY, 2012

    work page 2012

  32. [32]

    Chern.Complex Manifolds without Potential Theory

    S.-S. Chern.Complex Manifolds without Potential Theory. Springer New York, NY, 1 1979

    work page 1979

  33. [33]

    Griffith and J

    P. Griffith and J. Harris.Principles of Algebraic Geometry. Wiley-Interscience, 8 1994

    work page 1994

  34. [34]

    Springer New York, NY, 1 1992

    Joe Harris.Algebraic geometry. Springer New York, NY, 1 1992

    work page 1992

  35. [35]

    Arnold.Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics

    V.I. Arnold.Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics. Springer-Verlag, 2 edition, 1989

    work page 1989

  36. [36]

    Wootters

    W.K. Wootters. Entanglement of formation of an arbitrary state of two qubits.Phys. Rev. Lett., 80:2245–2248, Mar 1998

    work page 1998

  37. [37]

    Mosseri and R

    R. Mosseri and R. Dandoloff. Geometry of entangled states, bloch spheres and hopf fibrations.Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General, 34(47):10243, nov 2001

    work page 2001

  38. [38]

    Dissipative evolution of a two-level system through a geometry-based classical mapping, 2025

    Daniel Martínez-Gil, Pedro Bargueño, and Salvador Miret-Artés. Dissipative evolution of a two-level system through a geometry-based classical mapping, 2025

    work page 2025

  39. [39]

    Thegeometryofentanglement: metrics, connectionsandthegeometricphase

    P.Lévay. Thegeometryofentanglement: metrics, connectionsandthegeometricphase. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General, 37(5):1821, jan 2004

    work page 2004

  40. [40]

    Kuś and K

    M. Kuś and K. Życzkowski. Geometry of entangled states.Phys. Rev. A, 63:032307, Feb 2001

    work page 2001

  41. [41]

    Życzkowski I

    K. Życzkowski I. Bengtsson, J. Brännlund. Cpn, or, entanglement illustrated.International Journal of Modern Physics A, 17(31):4675–4695, 2002

    work page 2002

  42. [42]

    Bernevig and H.-D

    B.A. Bernevig and H.-D. Chen. Geometry of the three-qubit state, entanglement and division algebras.Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General, 36(30):8325, jul 2003

    work page 2003

  43. [43]

    Quantum entanglement as an aspect of pure spinor geometry

    V Kiosses. Quantum entanglement as an aspect of pure spinor geometry. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 47(40):405301, sep 2014. 10

    work page 2014