A Probabilistic Paraconsistent Logical Model for Non-Relativistic Quantum Mechanics Using Interlaced Bilattices with Conflation and Bernoulli Distribution
In this work, we make a representation of non-relativistic quantum theory based on foundations of paraconsistent annotated logic (PAL), a propositional and evidential logic with an associated lattice FOUR. We use the PAL version with annotation of two values (PAL2v), named paraquantum logic (PQL), where the evidence signals are normalized values and the intensities of the inconsistencies are represented by degrees of contradiction. Quantum mechanics is represented through mapping on the interlaced bilattices where this logical formalization allows annotation of two values in the format of degrees of evidence of probability. The Bernoulli probability distribution is used to establish probabilistic logical states that identify the superposition of states and quantum entanglement with the equations and determine the state vectors located inside the interlaced Bilattice. In the proposed logical probabilistic paraquantum logic model (pPQL Model), we introduce the operation of logical conflation into interlaced bilattice. We verify that in the pPQL Model, the operation of logical conflation is responsible for providing a suitable model for various phenomena of quantum mechanics, mainly the quantum entanglement. The results obtained from the entanglement equations demonstrate the formalization and completeness of paraquantum logic that allows for interpretations of similar phenomena of quantum mechanics, including EPR paradox and the wave-particle theory.
Feynman, R.P. (1965) The Feynman Lectures on Physics. Volume III, Chapter 1. Volume I, Chapters 30 and 38.
[3]
Feynman, R.P. (1948) Space-Time Approach to Non-Relativistic Quantum Mechanics. Reviews of Modern Physics, 20, 367. https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.20.367
[4]
Feynman, R.P. and Hibbs, R.H. (1965) Quantum Mechanics and Path Integrals. McGraw-Hill.
[5]
Birkhoff, G. and von Neumann, J. (1936) The Logic of Quantum Mechanics. Annals of Mathematics, 37, 823-843. https://doi.org/10.2307/1968621
[6]
Birkhoff, G. (1967) Lattice Theory. American Mathematical Society, Providence.
[7]
Piron, C. (1976) Foundations of Quantum Physics. W.A. Benjamin, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1440-3_7
[8]
Machey, G.M. (1963) The Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. W. A. Bejamin, New York.
[9]
Engesser, K., Gabbay, D.M. and Lehmann, D.A. (2007) New Approach to Quantum Logic (Studies in Logic Book 8). College Publications, 200 p.
[10]
Ekert, D.A. and Lupacchini, R. (2000) Machines, Logic and Quantum Physics. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, 3, 265-283.
[11]
Dishkant, H. (1972) Semantics of the Minimal Logic of Quantum Mechanics. Studia Logica, 30, 17-29. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02120818
[12]
Redei, M. (1998) Quantum Logic in Algebraic Approach. Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9026-6
[13]
Dalla Chiara, M.L. and Giuntini, R. (1989) Paraconsistent Quantum Logics. Foundations of Physics, 19, 891-904. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01889304
[14]
Dalla Chiara, M.L. and Giuntini, R. (1994) Unsharp Quantum Logics. Foundations of Physics, 24, 1161-1177. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02057862
[15]
Dalla Chiara, M., Giuntini, R. and Greechie, R. (2004) Reasoning in Quantum Theory. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0526-4
[16]
Abe, J.M., Nakamatsu, K., Akama, S. and Da Silva Filho, J.I. (2018) The Importance of Paraconsistency and Paracompleteness in Intelligent Systems. In: Czarnowski, I., Howlett, R. and Jain, L., Eds., Intelligent Decision Technologies 2017. IDT 2017. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, Vol. 73. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59424-8_18
[17]
Da Costa, N.C.A. and de Ronde, C. (2013) The Paraconsistent Logic of Quantum Superpositions. Foundations of Physics, 43, 845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-013-9721-9
[18]
Da Silva Filho, J.I., Nunes, V.C., Garcia, D.V.N., Mario, M.C., Giordano, F., Abe, J.M. Pacheco, M.T.T. and Silveira Jr., L. (2016) Paraconsistent Analysis Network Applied in the Treatment of Raman Spectroscopy Data to Support Medical Diagnosis of Skin Cancer. Reviews of Modern Physics, 54, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-016-1471-3
[19]
Da Costa, N.C.A. and Marconi, D. (1989) An Overview of Paraconsistent Logic in the 80’s. The Journal of Non-Classical Logic, 6, 5-31.
[20]
Subrahmanian, V.S. (1987) On the Semantics of Quantitative Logic Programs. Proc. 4th. IEEE Symposium on Logic Programming, Computer Society Press, Washington DC.
[21]
Da Silva Fiho, J.I., Lambert-Torres, G. and Abe, J.M. (2010) Uncertainty Treatment Using Paraconsistent Logic—Introducing Paraconsistent Artificial Neural Networks. In: Volume 211—Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, IOS Press, Amsterdam, 328 p.
[22]
Da Silva Filho, J.I. (2016) Undulatory Theory with Paraconsistent Logic (Part I): Quantum Logical Model with Two Wave Functions. Journal of Quantum Information Science, 6, 143-180. https://doi.org/10.4236/jqis.2016.63012
[23]
Da Silva Filho, J.I. (2016) Undulatory Theory with Paraconsistent Logic (Part II): Schrödinger Equation and Probability Representation. Journal of Quantum Information Science, 6, 181-213. https://doi.org/10.4236/jqis.2016.63013
[24]
Belnap, N. (1977) How a Computer Should Think. In: Ryle, G., Ed., Contemporary Aspects of Philosophy. Oriel Press, Stocksfield, 30-55.
[25]
Belnap, N. (1977) A Useful Four-Valued Logic. In: Dunn, J.M. and Epstein, G., Eds., Modern Uses of Multiple-Valued Logic, Reidel, Dordrecht, 8-37. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1161-7_2
[26]
Davey, B.A. and Priestley, H.A. (2005) Introduction to Lattices and Order. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
[27]
Wille, R. (1992) Concept Lattices and Conceptual Knowledge Systems. Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 23, 493-515. https://doi.org/10.1016/0898-1221(92)90120-7
[28]
Nedelman, J. and Wallenius, T. (1986) Bernoulli Trials, Poison Trials, Surprising Variances, and Jensens’s Inequality. The American Statistician, 40, 286-289.
[29]
Samuels, S.M. (1965) On the Number of Successes in Independent Trials. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 36, 1272-1278. https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177699998
[30]
Nielsen M.A. and Chuang, I.L. (2000) Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Cambridge University Press.
[31]
Rédei, M. (1989) Quantum Conditional Probabilities Are Not Probabilities of Quantum Conditional. Physics Letters A, 139, 287-290. https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-9601(89)90454-4
[32]
Grinstead, C.M. and Snell, J.L. (1997) Introduction to Probability. Providence, RI, American Mathematical Society.
[33]
Einstein, A., Podolsky, B. and Rosen, N. (1935) Can Quantum Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? Physical Review, 47, 777-780. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.47.777
[34]
Ginsberg, M.L. (1988) Multivalued Logics: A Uniform Approach to Inference in Artificial Intelligence. Computational Intelligence, 4, 265-316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8640.1988.tb00280.x
[35]
Horodecki, M.P. and Horodecki, R. (2001) Mixed-State Entanglement and Quantum Communication. Quantum Information, Springer Tracts in Modern Physics, 173, 151-195. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44678-8_5
