quantum mechanics ( qm ) , particularly featured by @xmath0 and @xmath1 , has been always facing the fundamental critics since its establishment @xcite .
the exact physical meaning of `` quantum '' is unclear , which leads to the well - known `` weirdness '' .
the development of quantum field theory ( qft ) , which is often viewed as an improved form of qm , does not resolve the seminal problems in qm , such as the direct physical meaning of wave function and phase , the role of quantization and measurement , etc .
the problem of the foundation of qm has been widely concerned again due to the progress of quantum information and quantum computing ( qiqc ) @xcite .
the concepts of nonlocality and entanglement have proven their importance , yet , there exist confusions between them @xcite .    for the research of foundation of qm , we can briefly clarify two sub - fields , one is the interpretation of qm @xcite , the other is the post - qm @xcite .
the problems and confusions on basic concepts even philosophy , such as the classical @xcite , hidden variable @xcite , collapse @xcite , etc are mostly addressed in the interpretations .
post - qm also devotes to the complete mathematical form of qm , such as the information - theoretic approach @xcite , the khler structure approach @xcite , etc .
the standard qm bases on several assumptions , and the physical explanations of the copenhagen ( orthodox ) interpretation are not satisfying .
uncertainty and complementarity are emphasized ; however , for uncertainty , there are different explanations , either based on measurement , knowledge , propensity , or reality @xcite . for the statistical meaning of the wave function and measurement
, the disagreement is more notable .
born viewed statistics as inherent , while einstein , by epr - argument @xcite , viewed statistics as a result of incompleteness of qm . the notable `` jump '' and
`` collapse '' do not have clear physical pictures .
the most primary problem is that the copenhagen interpretation did not give an exact and direct meaning to the wave function , e.g. , why @xmath1 is complex ?
indeed , there are direct efforts to explain the physical meaning of wave function , which led to the hidden variable method and bohm mechanics @xcite .
every particle is endowed with definite coordinate and trajectory under the restraint of guiding wave .
also , there exists the physical collapse theory aimed to explain collapse @xcite .
however , it modifies the schrdinger equation and the linearity , which is shown to be the analogy of the approaches based on decoherence @xcite . coherence and decoherence , which were not demonstrated in the standard qm , have gained lots of attentions these years .
for instance , the many - world interpretation @xcite views the universe as a coherent entity , and there exist the inner observer and relative state . the consistent ( decohered ) history approaches @xcite take the time evolution and measurement into account , and demonstrate the structure of quantum logic . in zurek s exsistential interpretation @xcite ,
the uncertainty principle is re - explained from the view of information , and the born s rule is deduced via the symmetry of envariance .
recently , kinds of information - theoretic theories @xcite are developed , where qm is viewed as a kind of information processing theory . with all these progresses , however , the exact essence of quantum has not been drawn .    at the same time ,
the continuous argument on foundation of qm also arose the reflection of the primary philosophical conception , which can not be avoided in the quantum physics .
the problem that why we can not easily understand qm just brings the problem that why we think the classical mechanics ( cm ) is normal . in this paper ,
our standing point is to view qm as a special kind of `` description '' of motion , from which , there is no good or bad of qm and cm @xcite .
the theories , with equations and models , deal with the same nature only revealing different aspects and properties .
the state vector in hilbert space can capture the properties of coherence , e.g. , interference , which is exotic for cm . on the contrary
, trajectory is the basic idea in cm and the macroscopic world , yet , not in qm , due to the uncertainty .
we note the trajectory in the path - integral method , which borrows ideas from cm , only has mathematical meaning . in practice ( reality ) , to employ which description depends on its efficiency .    in this work , we start from one new concept , `` scope '' , to check the foundation of qm .
we focus on the basic concepts and ideas in qm , mostly relating to superposition .
we do not intend to construct a broader theory with the standard qm as the special case , the methods based on scope mainly belong to the interpretation of qm .
scope describes the `` structure of motion '' , i.e. , the logic and systematic potential action region of the movement of a certain object ( system ) .
that is , from scope we can get the ability and the whole structure of the motion of the matter .
the merits of the concept of scope are multi - folds .
firstly , the direct one , the weirdness of qm can be resolved based on scope , the wave function and superposition can get their physical meaning . secondly , the abstract qm can gain solid natural foundation and physical essence , i.e. ,
qm is a totally new kind of description different with cm ( including statistical mechanics ) and also relativity .
thirdly , scope can bring new ideas .
for instance , the wave function and superposition principle can also be used in the mesoscopic and macroscopic scales , that is , the concept of scope is universal , can not be restricted by the scale .
also , qm may not rely on the hilbert space , since scope itself can form a kind of space , also there can be other kinds of space , e.g. , tangnet @xcite , relating to quantum information and entanglement . forth , another point , the concept of scope may have new indication of the basic ideas of nature and philosophy , e.g. , it means every object has finite ability of motion .
this work is divided into four parts . in sec .
[ sec : open ] , we start from the concept of openness , which is central for qm , to clarify several basic physical ideas . in sec . [ sec : scope ] , we introduce the new concept of `` scope '' , from which we discuss the physical meaning of superposition and entanglement , and to address the foundation of qm . in sec .
[ sec : entanglement ] , we study several kinds of quantum states , and we analyze the degree of entanglement and information .
several topics are discussed in the appendix .
one is the differences between scope and other existed methods , where we state that the concept of scope has never been proposed before .
another one is the model for the reduced entanglement , by comparison with the two - body problem in cm .
last , we study the physical meaning of entanglement measures at present , like negativity , relative entropy of entanglement . in sec . [
sec : conclusion ] , we conclude and discuss briefly the physical roles of scope in the foundation of qm .
in this section , before the study on the concept of scope and entanglement , we show that the concept of openness is fundamental in qm .
openness means that the quantum object can not be separated from the outside world , and the basic subject in qm is the open system , just the opposite of cm @xcite .
the physical reason for openness is the existence of quantum coherence .
we show that all the basic equations in qm demonstrate the openness and coherence .
the quantum coherence leads to many crucial facts , such as the double - slit interference , coherent and squeezed state of light , also the heisenberg s uncertainty principle , etc .
relating to measurement , the uncertainty principle states that any measurement disturbs the state of the quantum system , since the coherence is disturbed . on the contrary ,
the nature light from sun is not coherent as it is a kind of mixture . in cm
, there is no coherence , which is the main distinction between quantum and classical dynamics @xcite .
usually , in qm the method of density matrix @xcite is employed to capture coherence , which is represented by the non - diagonal elements .
a diagonal density matrix is said to be classical as the coherence vanishes .
in qft , there exists coherence since the quantum field itself is the coherent entity , such as vacuum , electromagnetical field etc , although the density matrix is not often used .
`` coherent '' means that the field as a whole has fixed amplitude and phase .
the micro - particles , as the excited state of field , have coherence since interactions between them are due to the field .
the facts of particle creation , classicality , and decoherence lead to the degeneracy of coherence , yet , particle can go back to its ground state via the annihilation operator , thus , re - excite the coherence @xcite .    in addition
, we note that the standard qm does not focus on the properties of field , e.g. , the creation and vanish of particles , also the origin of ensemble , which we will discuss below .      in qm
, there was the argument that whether quantum theory describes the dynamics of the single system or the ensemble @xcite .
according to the standard qm , the existence of ensemble is _ a priori _ fact .
for instance , in the double - slit interference experiment , the ensemble of electrons is used , the electrons are viewed as identical , and the state of electrons are the superposition of two modes corresponding to the two slits . here
, qm can not explain the origin of the ensemble ; in contrast , qft can give the creation - annihilation picture of the ensemble of electrons .
the quantum states of each electron before entering the slit are not necessarily orthogonal , and there exists field among the electrons , that is , the existence of ensemble does not mean there is no coherence .    yet
, the methods of qm are believed as universal @xcite , thus , it should provide the physical picture for ensemble .
recently , there are efforts to indicate the quantum origin of ensemble via entanglement @xcite .
it is shown that the system within the coherent universe behaves as the canonical ensemble , as if the universe were in the mixed state , in which each pure state has the equal probability .
physically , there can be kinds of coherence and decoherence processes in qm , which relates to the distinction between the fine - grained and coarse - grained description of states of the system @xcite .
we will further analyze this in the study of density matrix below .
in addition , we note that the concept of ensemble is similar to `` mixture '' , which is also widely employed in qm .
however , the `` mixed state '' is not an exact expression , e.g. , it does not indicate the state is of one single object or many objects
. we view mixture as the classical concept .
the coherence indicates the openness of quantum dynamics .
here we show that the basic equations of qm all demonstrate the openness . the schrdinger equation @xmath2 , where @xmath3 is viewed as the pure state vector of the system , from which the eigenstate and the eigen - energy can be deduced
. the single quantum system can be , e.g. , one electron , field , or ensemble of electrons , as long as there exists coherence . here
, `` single '' is different with that in cm , where the system is labeled by mass .
the wave function has the property of holistic , and we can say that the system is `` open inside '' . now , for schrdinger equation
, it is easy to get the following equations @xmath4 .
let the density matrix ( or statistical matrix ) @xmath5 , and @xmath6,\ ] ] which is the liouville equation .    in reality , it is often impossible to get the wave function , i.e. , to collect all the information of the system
this can be described by the well - known @xmath7 model , where the universe @xmath8 contains one system @xmath9 embodied by one environment @xmath10 .
the wave function distributes across @xmath9 and @xmath10 . according to the method of entanglement and schmidt decomposition @xcite : @xmath11 then the density matrix @xmath12 where coherence is the non - diagonal elements .
the state of the system is deduced by tracing out the environment @xmath13 with @xmath14 , which is often viewed as the origin of the classical measurement results .
further , interestingly , the wave function can also be written as @xmath15 where the set @xmath16 is also wave function , thus , not necessarily orthogonal , and the parameters @xmath17 are complex , with @xmath18 .
the state in eq .
( [ eq : wfes ] ) is the `` wave function of ensemble state '' ( wfes ) , the detailed properties are discussed in appendix [ sec : wfesd ] .
this decomposition is coarse - grained , i.e. , each @xmath19 can further be decomposed as the superposition of orthogonal states . in the ensemble , each party has the property of openness that there can be ( but not necessarily ) coherence between any two of them .
last , another well - known form is the wigner function @xcite in the quantum phase - space , which is often written as @xmath20 where the integral is across the whole space
. there exists a whole class of distribution functional , with the wigner function as the simplest and straightforward one @xcite . here , in the phase - space ,
the system is represented by the coordinate and its movement is momentum @xmath21 .
contrast with classical method , in wigner function , there exists another coordinate @xmath22 , which is integrated out .
the physical meaning is that the effects of the outside world ( environment ) should be deleted ( tracing out ) , so that we can confirm the existence of the system . from this point
, we can say that the phase - space approach in qm is also natural since it captures the essence of openness , the negative value of @xmath23 is one expression .    to sum up ,
in this section we show that the existence of coherence is central for quantum behaviour , which results in the openness demonstrated by all the basic equations of qm .
we note that here we do not study the detailed properties and classifications of quantum coherence . in the next section
, we will further show that quantum coherence and the property of openness can be based on the new concept of `` scope '' , and from which , we will analyze the direct physical meaning of the wave function and also entanglement .
in this section , we study the foundation of qm from the concept of `` scope '' .
briefly , scope , or quantum scope , describes the `` structure of motion '' , which means the action region of the motion , and the correlations among states and observable , rather than the casual dynamics , neither the structure of matter , nor matter . by comparison , according to cm , the object , labeled by mass @xmath24 , associates with a certain force , satisfying @xmath25 .
here , in qm every motion has a certain scope .
the wave function is indeed the scope of the quantum dynamics .
further , the concept of scope is not restricted within qm , it is the universal method , and it has the connections with other methods , such as relativity .
below , we present the theorems and properties of scope . before that
, we first note two points .
firstly , the concept of scope is in consistent with qm , since it is directly based on qm .
secondly , scope can give physical meaning to wave function and also superposition , then complete the basic principle of qm .
firstly , we present the theorems relating to scope itself , we state that the principles of superposition and entanglement are universal .
every motion has one scope @xmath26 .
here `` motion '' includes the condition when the observed velocity of one object is zero . strictly , there is no object at rest .
scope @xmath26 belongs to the motion of a certain object , not the object itself .
the concept of scope describes the ability of motion in a systematical way .
scope @xmath26 is composed with state @xmath27 and its weight @xmath28 , where @xmath29 , @xmath30 , @xmath31 decides the space of @xmath32 , labeled as @xmath33 .
the concept of `` state '' originates from qm and statistical physics .
@xmath27 can be a vector in the hilbert space , or the point in the tangnet space @xcite .
within one scope @xmath26 , there can be many physical states @xmath27 .
one motion can only be in state within its own scope .
the principle of superposition has two parts :    * _ the principle of superposition of scope @xmath26 _ : + the scope of motion can be expressed as the superposition of all the states within as @xmath34 there is a set of povm `` active operator '' @xmath35 which associates with @xmath26 and satisfies + @xmath36 + which means @xmath37 can act state @xmath38 out from scope @xmath26 . here , we employ dirac s `` bra - ket '' symbol @xcite .
@xmath37 satisfies    @xmath39    which means @xmath40 is the eigenvalue of the `` activer '' @xmath37 .
this is the alternative of the `` probabilistic interpretation '' of the coefficients @xmath40 in qm .
also @xmath41 which means all the states are acted out , that is , the whole scope @xmath26 is realized @xmath42 , thus @xmath43 .
this is the origin of the `` normalization regulation '' . from the probabilistic view , it means the sum of all the probabilities equals to 1 .    and , @xmath44 also , there exists the `` anti - active operator '' 1-@xmath45 .
we do not study the active operator in detail here .
* _ the principle of superposition of state @xmath1 _ : + the state of motion can be the coherent superposition state as @xmath46 where normalization means the norm of a state vector is @xmath47 , which is the result , yet not the same with the property of scope .
note that the superposition for mixed , pure , also classical states are all included .
there exists entanglement between two or multi- scopes .    the entangle process @xmath48 for two systems @xmath49 and @xmath50 can be written as    @xmath51    we note that the analysis can be generalized to multi - systems directly , here we focus on bi - party system for clarity .
@xmath52 represents the entangle process .
there are two parts of the principle of entanglement :    * _ the principle of entanglement of scope @xmath26 _ : + the entangled scope of motion can be @xmath53 where the sets of relative states @xcite @xmath54 and @xmath55 correlate with each other one - to - one , which can be labeled as the `` 1 - 1 branch '' rule . the details which @xmath38 is the relative state to @xmath56 is determined by nature , e.g. , the interaction .
+ there also exist the set of active operator @xmath57 , which satisfies @xmath58 where the branch latexmath:[$|\psi_i\rangle
\otimes |\phi_i\rangle \equiv     * _ the principle of entanglement of state @xmath1 _ : + the entangled state can be a part of the entangled scope @xmath60 three kinds of states have to be classified : ( 1 ) if @xmath61 , the state is truly entangled ; if @xmath62 , the state is separable , the same as the usual form in eq .
( [ eq : separable ] ) ; this means the separable state is also the result of the entangle process of scope thus containing quantum information as we will show below ; ( 3 ) if @xmath63 , the state reduces to a simple product state .    in reality , the branches within the entangled scope are not all necessarily realized , thus , the entangled state is the fragment of the scope as long as satisfying the normalization rule .
in addition , there may be interactions during the entangle process , however , entanglement describes the information transition or coherent correlations between different systems , instead of the energy transition .
we will define the degree of entanglement @xmath64 in sec .
[ sec : degree ] .
next , relating to qm , particularly the dynamics of the scope and state , there are two theorems .
there exist representations , corresponding to different complete sets formed by the commutative observable , labeled as `` the scope under representation '' .    in qm ,
the physical reason for representation is that there exist different complete sets , which is demonstrated by bohr s complementarity principle @xcite .
we note that , according to the consistent history approach @xcite , there exist several frameworks , which also satisfy the complementarity principle .
this theorem indicates again that the concept of scope is the systematical , instead of casual , description of the potentiality and structure of the motion .
there exist pictures , corresponding to different frames and time choice .
there are three basic kinds of pictures as follows :    * _ the frame is set on the motion itself _ : schrdinger picture .
+ the scope @xmath65 ( can also be labeled as @xmath9 ) satisfies the schrdinger equation @xmath66 where @xmath67 is the hamiltonian .
the solution of this equation is the `` structure of the motion '' . here
, `` @xmath68 '' means the change of space rather than the evolution of time @xcite .
in fact , `` @xmath68 '' means the `` gradually evolving of the scope '' .
the dynamical variables do not change with time .
we mention that in quantum cosmology , eq . ( [ eq : sch ] ) becomes @xmath69 , where the hamiltonian includes the gravitational field plus all matter sources in the universe , the external timing parameter @xmath68 vanishes naturally @xcite .
* _ the frame is set external _ : heisenberg picture .
+ the dynamical variable @xmath70 satisfies @xmath71,\ ] ] which means the change of dynamical variable in different states within the fixed scope .
* _ the frame is set in - between _ : dirac ( interaction ) picture @xcite .
+ @xmath72 , @xmath73 , satisfying @xmath74,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath75 .
the existence of pictures and the problem of the external parameter @xmath68 reveal that scope mostly describes the logic structure of the states , from which the commutation relations of observable do not change with time .
last , we show another kind of property of scope .
there exist relations between the concept of scope and relativity , which describes the coherent properties of the space - time metric of the object . here
, we only present the mostly crucial conjecture as below .
the scope @xmath26 can be influenced by mass @xmath76 .
this theorem sets the connection between the motion of a certain object and the object itself .
it means that objects with different masses can not have the same scope .
every scope is unique . also , the shape of scope is not regularly euclidian .
in general , it is topologically non - euclidian .
please see the geometrical properties @xmath77 of scope below .      in this subsection , we study some properties and consequences deduced from the theorems above of scope .
scope @xmath26 has a certain geometrical shape .
the number of state @xmath31 can not be zero .
the states within the scope can form certain shape .
for instance , if there is one single state , @xmath31=1 , the corresponding shape of scope is just a point ( in geometry ) . if @xmath31=2 , the shape is one segment line , straight or carved , with a certain length . if @xmath31=3 , the shape is one triangle face , with a certain area . if @xmath31=4 , the shape is one tetrahedron . if @xmath78 , the shape is one ball .
we should state that the shape is in the three - dimensional space , euclidian or non - euclidian , different from the shape in the high - dimensional space , such as the hilbert space .
the shape not only has the `` shell '' with boundary and face , also it has inner structure .
particularly , when @xmath78 , if we neglect its structure , the ball can be viewed as one point .
this is the alternative of the `` classical limit '' of the orthodox qm by taking @xmath79 .
we note that the geometric properties of quantum states are under research , see ref .
@xcite for instance .
scope @xmath26 has a certain magnitude .
the magnitude is defined as the length ( or the area , the volume ) of its shape . to calculate
, we have to specialize the `` distance '' between different states .
for instance , we can use the energy @xmath10 to define the distance @xmath80 , such as @xmath81    the magnitudes of @xmath26 of different movements should be different , since they have physical meanings .
the bigger the magnitude , the better the ability of the motion , thus , the more `` freedom '' in the scope @xmath26 .
the magnitude is not necessarily equal to one , which is different with the normalization condition .
one particular scope @xmath26 has its own space - time matric .
this is the direct result of theorem @xmath82 . when the effect of mass is not obvious
, we can set the space - time matric of different scopes the same with each other , which is another kind of classical limit , or the low - energy limit .
the scope @xmath26 has the properties of `` reality '' ( actuality ) and `` propensity '' .
when @xmath37 acts , the certain state @xmath38 is realized , from potential to real , and the scope @xmath26 `` gradually evolves to its whole form '' .
there is the transition between reality and propensity .
actually , the two aspects of scope were studied a long time ago by aristotle in the ancient greece @xcite .
the method was mostly ignored and was claimed as `` metaphysical '' useless for physics . yet , the idea of propensity has gained quite a lot of attentions in recent years @xcite .
the concept of @xmath26 manifests that qm is the systematical description of the structure of movement , which is totally new compared with the classical dynamical method , from which the `` local realism '' @xcite originates . thus , we view the critics based on local realism as the misunderstanding of the essence of qm . here
, we do not discuss the problems of local realism and nonlocality in detail .    also , there is no `` collapse '' @xcite .
collapse means that when there is measurement , the state collapses from superposed state to the eigenstate . or
, some others view the collapse happens in our knowledge @xcite .
in fact , with the process of decoherence @xcite , when the initial state is superposed , it decoheres instead of collapse when there is measurement or environment .
measurement is a process of entanglement .
this is a simple result of the fact that the apparatus also has one scope with the states relative to the observed system .
the measurement process is the disturbance of system to apparatus ( or environment ) @xcite .
the measurement problem in qm @xcite , as well as the observe effect in relativity , can be well explained with the method of entanglement , and the change of our knowledge is another story @xcite .
there are mainly two kinds of states : time - quasistatic ( tq ) state and ensemble - isotactic ( ei ) state .    at present
, there is no unified classification of quantum states .
briefly , there are many kinds due to different criterions , such as separable / entangled , pure / mixed , local / non - local states , etc .
the non - unification just indicates that the underlying physical reason for the classification is not clear .    we give a new classification as follows :    * onefold state * * eigenstate * * superposed state * * * time - quasistatic ( tq ) superposed state * * * ensemble - isotactic ( ei ) superposed state * multifold state * * factorizable state : product , separable , etc * * entangled state * * * time - quasistatic ( tq ) entangled state * * * ensemble - isotactic ( ei ) entangled state
firstly , state is differentiated according to whether it is a multifold ( many - body ) state . for a single object ,
its state is onefold state .
there can be superposed state according to the principle of superposition . for multifold system which contains several inner parts ,
the state is multifold state , and there can be entangled state .
the separable state can be viewed as a kind of factorizable state , which we will study in the next section .
the distinction of time - quasistatic ( tq ) state and ensemble - isotactic ( ei ) state bases on the theorem of ergodicity of statistical physics and the principle of identity in qm @xcite .
for example , the double - slit state of the electron ( or other particles ) is the ei superposed state , which characterizes the electron ensemble . in this state , for one particular electron , it can only pass through one slit at one time , thus , the state of a single electron is not superposed .
another example , as we know , we can use laser to control a certain two - level atom , and drive it to the so - called rabi oscillation @xcite .
this is the tq state , the population transfers from one state to another periodically .
the famous bell basis are the ei entangled state , such as the light source from type - ii spdc @xcite in the teleportation experiment , describing the ensemble of photons , the state of one photon is not entangled or superposed .
an excellent example of tq entangled state is the electrons forming the chemical bonding in the molecules .
the difference between ( ei ) state and ( tq ) state is the `` inner '' dynamics of the state itself , thus , this kind of definition is obviously not mathematical .
however , in our study below , we do not care about this difference without loss of generality .
, thus , qu@xmath83it ) .
the correlation between scopes or states is depicted as straight line ( string ) . ]
qm often deals with the properties of many - body ( instead of single or infinite ) system . to characterize the quantum features , at present ,
there exist three widely studied methods : nonlocality @xcite , nonclassicality @xcite , and entanglement @xcite .
traditionally , nonclassicality was introduced in the quantum phase - space in the context of quantum optics .
the state of light , e.g. , squeezed light , contains nonclassicality compared with the coherent light , which sets the boarder between quantum and classical states .
we note that the continuous variable ( cv ) system in phase - space can be translated into the fock space , from which the entanglement can be defined .
interestingly , after the seminal work of epr @xcite and bell @xcite , the nonlocality of entangled state was demonstrated with nonclassical light @xcite , where the three methods are all involved . in this work , we do not intend to analyze the relations of them ; instead , we focus on entanglement relating to superposition and the concept of scope . part of our study on entanglement has been presented in ref .
we will study the physical role of entanglement in various quantum states , and the degree of entanglement , also we compare with different entanglement measure in appendix [ sec : measure ] .
entanglement is widely studied in qiqc , and it is believed to be the key for information processing and computing . however , entanglement is not indispensable . in quantum cryptography ,
the bb@xmath84 does not rely on entanglement @xcite ; instead , particularly the b@xmath85 protocol shows that it is the nonorthogonality ( also no - cloning ) that ensures the security of the key @xcite .
the recently studied continuous variable ( cv)-quantum key distribution ( qkd ) @xcite and decoy - state qkd @xcite , also do not rely on entanglement , which indeed are the improvement of the bb@xmath84 protocol .
this indicates that the quantum nature of information acts even when there is no entanglement , i.e. , the quantum information does not necessarily depends on entanglement . in quantum computing ,
the well - known qdc@xmath47 model is shown not directly rely on entanglement @xcite ; instead , the quantum discord plays the central role @xcite . in another line of research , there are attempts to build qkd on the foundation of nonlocality and nonlocal box , where entanglement does not play the central role @xcite .    the examples above indicate that entanglement is not such quantity viewed from the information - theoretic framework ( itf ) , which is the theoretic paradigm or the world view correlating with the research of qiqc to re - consider quantum theory and its foundation from the information point , where information is believed as physical and fundamental @xcite . on the contrary , especially from the concept of scope , entanglement is the direct generalization of superposition , not necessarily related to information ( entropy ) , physically .
the original cv - entangled state of epr @xcite and ( discrete variable ) dv - entangled state of spin of bohm @xcite do not relate to information .
the analysis of schrdinger just reveals that information can be effected by entanglement @xcite .
also , entanglement does not only play roles in qiqc .
for instance , in quantum chemistry , entanglement plays roles in the formation of molecules and chemical reactions .
further , the so - called `` quantum information '' is quite misleading , as the zeilinger s
principle @xcite states that there is no quantum information , there is only information processing with quantum sources .
that is to say , information can be effected by the quantum features , including nonorthogonality ( superposition ) , entanglement , also nonlocality and nonclassicality .              in this section
, we will systematically study the quantum correlations of the bi - party system , the results for the multi - party system will be presented in other places . also , without loss of generality , we assume here that the branches within the entangled scope are all realized , i.e. mathematically , the entangled state is the same with the entangled scope . relating to the analysis in sec . [
sec : ensemble ] , the entangled state can be realized both for single quantum system and the ensemble of quantum system .
the quantum states we analyze include :    * product state ; entangled qudit ; decohered qudit ; * ensemble - product state ; separable state ; ensemble - entangled qudit ; ensemble - decohered qudit .    for clarity of the physical picture ,
we develop a kind of diagram to represent the scope . as shown in fig .
[ fig.product](a ) , the circle stands for the scope , and the points within stand for the orthogonal eigenstates ( with number @xmath83 ) .
the correlation between scopes or states is depicted as straight line ( string ) , the dashed line stands for decohered string .
the states we consider are shown in fig .
[ [ fig.product]-[fig.ensemble ] ] .
_ product state .
_ as well - known , product state contains no correlation . here
, we can describe three kinds of product states .
suppose the two sub - systems are @xmath86 and @xmath87 , with orthogonal eigenstate @xmath88 and @xmath89 , respectively .
the state @xmath90 is product state .
the more complex product form is @xmath91 where @xmath92 , @xmath93 .
we note that the states for @xmath86 and @xmath87 are not ensemble .
this product state is shown in fig .
[ fig.product](b ) .
the third kind is the ensemble - product state , shown in fig . [
fig.product](c ) .
the wave functions of the systems @xmath86 and @xmath87 can be written as @xmath94 which is the coarse - grained decomposition , since there exist the sub- wave functions @xmath95 , @xmath96 , and generally @xmath97 . with @xmath98 ,
the density matrix can be easily written as @xmath99 the ensemble - product state is @xmath100 the state @xmath101 contains quantum information , although there is no entanglement .
there is coherence for the @xmath102 and @xmath103 , that is , there can be decoherence process .
the result of the decoherence is that the local state of @xmath86 and @xmath87 become @xmath104 , and @xmath105 .
yet , the global state @xmath106 remains as product .
_ entangled qudit . _
the general form of the entangled qudit is written as @xmath107 and the density matrix is expressed as @xmath108 with @xmath109 .
the state @xmath110 , shown in fig .
[ fig.entangled](a ) , can be viewed as a part of the product state @xmath111 in case ( b ) above , by selecting out the branches according to the permutation symmetry .
the coherence of the state @xmath110 is represented by the non - diagonal elements .
when decoherence occurs by some disturbance , the state @xmath110 becomes diagonal , which is said to be classical .
the decohered ( classical ) qudit is @xmath112 let @xmath113 , @xmath114 , and introduce the parameter @xmath115 , then @xmath116 which is separable .
that is , for the single decohered qudit , it is classical as well as separable .
this state is shown in fig . [ fig.entangled](b ) .
_ separable state . _ the well - known separable state @xcite in fig .
[ fig.ensemble](a ) is defined as @xmath117 with the normalization relation @xmath118 .
we show that the separable state @xmath119 is the analogy of entangled state @xmath110 , except that the former one employs the coarse - grained decomposition , while the latter one employs the fine - grained decomposition , i.e. , the eigenstates are orthogonal .
the decomposition is the same with those in equations ( [ eq : cg1 ] ) and ( [ eq : cg2 ] ) .
then equation ( [ eq : separable ] ) can be written as @xmath120 ) .
the ensemble ( sets ) @xmath121 and @xmath122 are not classical , while the ensemble @xmath123 and @xmath124 are classical .
this reveals that there exists quantum information in the separable state .
then , when the separable state goes to the classical state ? consider the case when only one eigenstate each is acted out , that is @xmath125 , and also let latexmath:[$\langle \psi_{\xi}^{a(b ) }    @xmath119 in equation ( [ eq : separable2 ] ) becomes the same with the classical state @xmath127 in equation ( [ eq : decoher ] ) .
we can label this as the `` classical reduction procedure '' .
let us give a simple example of the @xmath128 system .
it is reasonable to set @xmath129 , and @xmath130 , then the separable state is @xmath131 which is also classical .    generally , when @xmath132 , the separable form of the density matrix does not rely on the local coherence within @xmath102 and @xmath103 , which just indicates that there can be quantum information in the separable state .
_ ensemble - entangled qudit . _
the ensemble of entangled state is often studied in qiqc , such as the ensemble of bell s state . for single
entangled qudit , it can be written in the schmidt basis as @xmath133 with @xmath134 .
the density matrix of this ensemble can be expressed as @xmath135(b ) .
it is easy to see that when applies the classical reduction procedure , @xmath125 , and @xmath136 , the state @xmath137 reduces to classical and also separable .    when decoherence occurs , each entangled qudit becomes classically correlated , and the ensemble - decohered qudit is @xmath138 which is classical but not separable , shown in fig .
[ fig.ensemble](c ) .
further , to make the distinctions of the quantum states clear , we can classify four kinds of correlations : entanglement , decohered classicality , nonorthogonality , and coarse - grained classicality . the quantum characters in the states we studied are different . in
the single entangled qudit , the entanglement is the global shared coherence , there is also the classical correlation . for the decohered qudit
, the shared coherence disappears , thus there is only classicality .
the ensemble - entangled qudit , which relies on the coarse - grained decomposition , contains another kind of shared coherence due to nonorthogonal local states , namely , @xmath139 , we name it as nonorthogonality .
correspondingly , there exists another kind of classicality , via the parameter @xmath140 , instead of the correlations of the eigenstates between @xmath86 and @xmath87 .
we name this kind of correlation as coarse - grained classicality , and the former one as decohered classicality . from this analysis ,
we can briefly present the main characters of quantum state in table i.    [ tab:1 ]    [ cols="^,^,^,^,^,^,^",options="header " , ]      in this section , we study superposition and entanglement quantitatively . before our analysis
, we note that the superposition and entanglement are both due to the existence of coherence , local and global ( shared ) , respectively .
entanglement is not the quantum information ; instead , the classical information ( correlation ) can be effected by the entanglement ( shared coherence ) , thus , the so - called `` quantum information '' .
we can say that entanglement and quantum information ( entropy ) are the two related kinds of characters of the entangled state .
below , we present the definitions of the degree of superposition , entanglement , and nonorthogonality , which all relate to the quantum coherence
. +    degree of superposition @xmath141 .
+ for a superposed state vector @xmath142 , where @xmath143 [ def:1 ]    notice that , by introducing the @xmath144-norm as @xmath145@xmath146 , then the @xmath147-norm is @xmath148@xmath149 , thus , @xmath150 .
this indicates that the @xmath147-norm has physical meaning , i.e. , describing the degree of superposition .
let us show some examples .
when @xmath151 , @xmath152 .
@xmath153 , @xmath154 , @xmath155 , and max(@xmath141)@xmath156 when @xmath157 .
@xmath158 , @xmath159 , @xmath160 , and max(@xmath141)@xmath161 when @xmath162 . then generally , for @xmath163 , max(@xmath141)@xmath164 etc .
that is , for @xmath31 , the maximal degree of superposition @xmath141 is @xmath165 , and the minimum approaches to _
zero_. if there are more eigenstates in a superposed state , then the degree of superposition it can get is bigger .
it means , physically , that although a state vector in the hilbert space has to be normalized , the degree of superposition is not a relative quantity , it characterizes the amount of coherence .
degree of entanglement @xmath166 .
+ for a general entangled state with @xmath24 subsystems @xmath167 with each @xmath31-dimensional : @xmath168 , the degree of entanglement @xmath169 [ def:2 ]    the same with the degree of superposition , we can get @xmath170 .
our definition @xmath171 is similar with negativity ( see appendix [ sec : measure ] ) , thus , we do not present the proof of the entanglement monotone @xcite , which states that the entanglement can not increase under the local quantum operation and classical communication ( locc ) . according to our understanding based on scope and coherence , the locc constraint is the property of quantum information ( entropy ) instead of entanglement ( globally shared coherence ) .
yet , it is easy to check that entanglement obviously satisfies the locc constraint since the quantum coherence can not be created via classical way .
the definition @xmath171 defines entanglement in a positive way . as a result , the locc constraint is not sufficient to define entanglement , and not all non - separable states are entangled ( sec . [ sec : states ] ) .
next we study some basic applications .
we assume the coefficients are all positive , without loss of generality .    for @xmath128 system , if @xmath172 label @xmath173 , @xmath174 .
there are two kinds of entangled state according to the nature of the branches ( strings ) .
if @xmath175 of @xmath86 correlates with @xmath175 of @xmath87 , it is named as `` direct '' ( @xmath176 ) ; if @xmath175 correlates with @xmath177 , it is named as `` cross '' ( @xmath178 ) : @xmath179 and the degree of entanglement @xmath180 generally , @xmath181 .
after some algebra , we can get @xmath182 introduce the reduced degree of entanglement @xmath183 then we can get the fundamental relation @xmath184 when @xmath185 , @xmath186 , @xmath187 , @xmath188 , @xmath189 , and @xmath190 .
this is the maximal condition for the qubit .
in addition , for the reduced degree of entanglement of the qubit system , we will further study the physical properties by comparing to the classical two - body problem in appendix [ sec : reduced ] .    for @xmath191 system ,
if @xmath192 there are four kinds of entangled state , which belongs to the greenberger - horne - zeilinger ( ghz ) state @xcite : @xmath193 and it is easy to write the four degree of entanglement ( we do not present here ) , after some algebra , we get @xmath194 also , introduce the reduced degree of entanglement @xmath195 then @xmath196    for the maximal condition , when all the coefficients equal to @xmath197 , @xmath198 , @xmath199 , and @xmath200 .
generally , for @xmath201 system , the maximal reduced entanglement is @xmath202 .
this means when we add the numbers of systems to be entangled , the reduced entanglement becomes smaller and smaller , that is , the entanglement of the whole system becomes more fragile , when one subsystem is disturbed , the total entanglement vanishes .    for @xmath203 system , if @xmath204 and the degree of superposition @xmath205 there are six kinds of entangled state according to the symmetry between the branches within the entangled state .
here we only give two examples , the other four are easy to be drawn : @xmath206 the entanglements of these six states have the form @xmath207 . after some algebra , we can get @xmath208 for the maximal condition , when @xmath209 , @xmath210 , @xmath211 , @xmath212 . for this bi - qutrit entangled state
, there is no definite form of reduced entanglement .    for @xmath213 system , there exist totally twenty - four different states , each has four branches .
the entanglement also can be written as @xmath214 .
we get the following equations @xmath215 for the maximal condition , when @xmath216 , @xmath217 , @xmath218 , @xmath219 .
generally , for @xmath220 system , there are @xmath221 different entangled states , set @xmath207 , we can get the general equations as @xmath222 for the maximal condition , when @xmath223 , @xmath224 , @xmath225 , @xmath226 .
that is , for the two - party systems , when the number of states entangled together increases , the max(@xmath166 ) also increases , like the superposition @xmath141 .
this is reasonable since when more states are entangled together , the amount of entanglement should increase , and the state becomes more robust .    for the higher dimensional systems ,
the math is a little complex , and the physical picture is not so clear .
we do not analyze them here .
next , we turn to the quantization of the four kinds of correlations we defined in the last subsection .    for the entangled qudit ,
the entanglement is the shared coherence , so the degree of entanglement @xmath166 can be easily calculated , according to the definition [ def:2 ] above .
also , as we have discussed , we can employ different forms of entropy to characterize the quantum information .
at present , the well - known quantities include von neumann entropy , relative entropy , quantum discord , squashed entanglement , entanglement of formation , cost , and distillation , etc @xcite .
we will study some of them in appendix [ sec : measure ] .    for the decohered qudit ,
there is pure classical correlation without shared quantum coherence .
also , there exist the complete projective measurements , under which the classical density matrix remains @xcite .
the information is characterized by the von neumann entropy .    for the four kinds of ensemble state ,
see table i , there exists nonorthogonality .
this kind of coherence is not globally shared by the two parties @xmath86 and @xmath87 , yet , it is shared by the local states @xmath227 of @xmath86 , and the local states @xmath228 of @xmath87 .
the degree of nonorthogonality can be defined as @xmath229 in the sum , each element is smaller than one , yet , the sum can be arbitrarily big even infinity .
this is reasonable since the quantity of coherence increases with the amount of the ensemble .
particularly , we note that the separable state contains the quantum nonorthogonality thus quantum information , although there is no entanglement .    the coarse - grained classicality results from the classical parameter @xmath140 ,
so the classical information can be easily calculated via the von neumann entropy @xmath230 .
last , we make some comments on the mixed state , which , in deed , is a rather broad and rough method
. the mixed state with purity smaller than unity is a `` fragment '' of a global pure state with an unknown part lost , thus , it is not easy to decide the exact structure of the mixed state . at present , there exist lots of ways to detect the entanglement , and different methods can be unified with the method of entanglement witness in a way @xcite . yet , even we can find the entanglement , we can not decide the structure of the mixed state .
that is to say , to find how the mixed state is formed is more valuable and practical .
the six kinds of states studied above can serve as some standard or assistant to detect the quantum correlations . when a mixed state @xmath231 can be written as similar to any standard state , labeled as @xmath232 , that is , if @xmath233 , then the quantum correlation ( entanglement , nonorthogonality , etc ) of @xmath231 can be defined as that of @xmath232 times @xmath234 .
@xmath235 can be viewed as the disturbance or perturbation to @xmath232 .
this method is similar with the relative entropy method @xcite and the lewenstein - sanpera ( ls ) decomposition @xcite .    to sum up , in this section
, we quantify the degree of superposition and entanglement , and also nonorthogonality .
physically , entanglement is directly based on superposition , and nonorthogonality is also the result of superposition .
the four kinds of correlations can be easily calculated .
the weirdness of qm is a result of the nature of quantum coherence , the abstractness of quantum description , and the confusions on quantum logic and philosophy .
the concept of scope , which is exotic for cm , relativity , statistical mechanics , also classical wave mechanics , just represents the quantum origin .
it describes the possible ( potential ) action region and the systematic and coherent structure of movement of a certain object .
superposition and entanglement are the natural results of scope with definite physical meaning . also , we discussed the properties of four kinds of quantum correlations and the six kinds of quantum states , and we show that entanglement is related yet different with entropy .
further , the concept of scope brings new methods to the standard qm .
one is that the scope itself has certain geometric features , just similar to the matter itself .
this may indicate that the structure of the motion of the matter is more crucial than the structure of the matter itself .
the other is that , rather than the information - theoretic framework , there exists a new kind of space , i.e. , tangnet , on which the quantum structure with entanglement exists @xcite . as a result , the concept of scope lays the new starting point to the foundation of qm . in the future ,
further efforts on , e.g. , the geometrical properties of tangnet , the comparison of scope with other interpretations , also the relation between nonlocality and entanglement , are needed .
in addition , the physical roles of entanglement in qiqc are also widely concerned , we hope our approach can bring new ideas on some tough problems , such as the bound entanglement @xcite , the analogy of entanglement to energy or entropy , etc .
in hilbert space , one state vector can be decomposed via orthogonal basis also non - orthogonal basis .
physically , the two decompositions can be endowed with different physical contents : for single system , there only exists orthogonal physical basis ; while for ensemble , there can be non - orthogonal basis . for example , the spin state in one quantum dot can be up or down , or to the left or right in the diagonal basis ; for a collection of spins in quantum dots , the superposed states of spins form the non - orthogonal basis .
mathematically , based on the measurement theory , especially the positive operator - valued measure ( povm ) @xcite , we can see the wfes has the corresponding properties as the wave function of pure state .    for the pure state @xmath236
, it satisfies : ( 1 ) normalization : @xmath237 ; ( 2 ) completeness relation : @xmath238 ; ( 3 ) projective measurement : there exist a set of projective operators @xmath239 satisfying @xmath240 , the expectation value @xmath241 ; note that when the non - projective povm operator acts on the pure state , it can not distinguish its basis ; ( 4 ) probabilistic interpretation : @xmath242 means the probability to find state @xmath243 with projector @xmath244 ; ( 5 ) observable : the expectation value of observable @xmath245 is @xmath246 , with @xmath247 ; ( 6 ) evolution : @xmath248 also the basis @xmath243 satisfy schrdinger equation ; ( 7 ) decoherence : the non - diagonal elements in @xmath249 disappear , leading to state @xmath250 , each part @xmath251 forms the classical trajectory ; ( 8) quantum reference frame @xcite : to determine the preferred basis @xmath252 , the reference frame and certain interaction are needed to form the entangled state , i.e. , the coherence within @xmath248 delocalizes to form entanglement ; thus , by ignoring the reference frame , the state @xmath248 decohered .    for the wfes , the state in eq .
( [ eq : wfes ] ) , the properties are similar while more complicated . we firstly note that if @xmath253 , it reduces to the pure state case ; if the states @xmath16 are orthogonal with each other , it goes to the totally classical ( decohered ) state .
instinctively , there exists one pure density matrix , labeled as @xmath254 , which is @xmath255 to form the density matrix @xmath231 , the non - diagonal elements disappear , with coefficients @xmath256 , which is actually a kind of decoherence .
the state @xmath257 indicates that before the formation of the ensemble , there exists one decoherence process .
physically , the state @xmath3 stands for the `` field '' of the ensemble , and the ensemble emerges from the field after the decoherence process , i.e. , the creation of particles @xcite .
note that here we do not study this issue with quantum field theory .
we name this kind of coherence as _ sub - coherence _ , or coarse - grained coherence , and the decoherence as _ sub - decoherence_. to arrive at the classical state , the standard decoherence
is then needed .
if we only account coherence by ignoring sub - coherence , we can view @xmath3 as the wfes , from which , the density matrix @xmath231 for the ensemble emerges .
further , the sub - decoherence can be introduced by one quantum reference frame @xmath258 , which with @xmath257 forms @xmath259 which is exactly the separable state @xcite .
note that for pure state , the system and its reference frame form the entangled state .
correspondingly , the basic properties of wfes are : ( 1 ) normalization : @xmath260 ; ( 2 ) completeness relation : @xmath261 ; ( 3 ) measurement : there exist a set of povm operators @xmath262 satisfying @xmath263 , the expectation value @xmath264 ; note that the measurement does not act on the fine - grained orthogonal basis directly ; ( 4 ) probabilistic interpretation : @xmath265 means the probability to find state @xmath266 with operator @xmath267 ; ( 5 ) observable : the expectation value of observable @xmath245 is @xmath268 , with @xmath269 ; ( 6 ) evolution : states @xmath3 and @xmath266 both satisfy schrdinger equation , with which the liouville equation for @xmath231 is equivalent ; ( 7 ) sub - decoherence : the non - diagonal elements in @xmath270 disappear , leading to quantum ensemble @xmath231 ; decoherence : the party @xmath266 each can further decohere , leading to classical state and classical trajectory , respectively ; ( 8) quantum reference frame : to determine the preferred basis @xmath271 , the reference frame @xmath232 and certain interaction are needed to form the separable state , i.e. , the sub - coherence within @xmath3 delocalizes to form separability ; thus , by ignoring the reference frame , the state sub - decoheres ; further , if there exists the entanglement - type reference frame , the state eventually decoheres to classical trajectory .
last , to illustrate the difference between coherence and sub - coherence , we give one simple example : suppose there are only two parties , @xmath272 and @xmath273 , in the ensemble , and each party with only two orthogonal basis @xmath274 and @xmath275 , and @xmath276 , @xmath277 .
note that even if party @xmath273 is not in the basis @xmath278 , there can be rotation which can rotate it to this basis , with effects absorbed in the coefficients .
thus , the density matrix of wfes is written as    @xmath279 and its conjugate , when they disappear , the state @xmath257 sub - decoheres to the quantum ensemble @xmath231 .
the coherence is represented as the coefficients @xmath280 , @xmath280 and their conjugate , when they disappear , the state decoheres to the classical state , labeled as @xmath281 , with diagonal elements @xmath282 , @xmath283 , and @xmath284 .
_ scope and qft . _ in qft , the wave function is further viewed as the operator , which is the well - known `` second quantization '' . the total number of particles is not conserved as there always exist the fluctuations of field and creation / annihilatin of particles .
particle itself is viewed as the excited state of field , and field is viewed as a kind of matter , whose motion exists within itself .
thus , the second quantization of wave function , i.e. , scope , means to view the structure of the motion as the equivalence of the structure of matter , also to view the motion of the matter as the same with the matter itself , which is reasonable for field .
this is also consistent with the mass - energy relation @xmath285 from relativity .
however , for particles , atoms etc in qm , the object itself is different with its motion , thus , it is not proper to view scope as a kind of matter ; instead , scope should be viewed as a kind of description of the logical structure of the motion of the object .    in history , another physical picture similar with qft is mainly developed by de broglie , namely , the `` pilot wave '' approach @xcite , in which the particle with definite local form sits at a certain place in the real pilot wave , and the particle can be viewed as the high - energy concentrate singularity of the wave .
the pilot - wave describes the collective motion of two objects : particle and wave , which indeed goes to the method of qft .
this relates to the `` wave - particle duality '' that the particle can perform both classical particle property and wave property , but not both of them at the same time @xcite .
also , the concept of `` matter wave '' was developed .
however , according to the concept of scope , the relation @xmath286 should be explained as that the object has the particle property ( @xmath24 ) and wave property ( @xmath234 ) within its own scope , consistent with the wave - particle duality . as a result
, the matter wave can not be viewed as a kind of matter , and indeed , the so - called matter wave does not exist .
we note that the other theory , bohmian mechanics @xcite , in which the particle has the trajectory restrained by the wave function , is consistent with the methods of qtf and scope .    _ consistent history ( ch ) _
this is a widely studied form of qm , yet , there exist different approaches .
this theory has the similar character with our methods based on scope , particularly the active operator .
however , in ch , there is no reason for the physical meaning of the decomposition of the identity .
next , we present our understanding for the ch .
generally , ch takes the evolution of state in time into account .
the main quantity , the decoherence functional @xcite is defined as @xmath287 where @xmath231 is the density matrix .
the class operator is @xmath288 , with @xmath289 , @xmath290 means that @xmath291 acts on the scope instead of state .
@xmath291 is the projective decomposition of the identity , @xmath292    when @xmath293 , @xmath294 , which is the probability of the history , and the normalization @xmath295 .    when @xmath296 , if @xmath297 , then we say the history is decohered .    in figure [ fig.ch ] ,
we show one consistent history .
we put state and operator on the equal footing , then form the state - operator space .
@xmath298 is the eigenstate set as the ordinate , the abscissa is the @xmath291 , where @xmath299 associates with time @xmath300 . for simplicity , we set @xmath301 , i.e. , there are six states within the scope . from the figure
, we can easily get the activers of the history : @xmath302 .
in addition , there can be other kinds of history , e.g. , several activers can act together as @xmath303 causing the superposed state .
eigenstates within the scope , and the number of the projection ( activer ) @xmath299 represents the evolve of time .
when the states become continuum , the lattice space becomes continuous space .
the black polylines stands for the consistent history.,scaledwidth=33.0%,scaledwidth=25.0% ]    _ kraus operator for open system _ @xcite .
we study via the widely concerned model of the pure universe @xcite .
let universe @xmath8 be composed with system @xmath9 and environment @xmath10 , labeled as @xmath7 . the initial state is @xmath304 and @xmath305 , correspondingly , the initial state for the universe is thus @xmath306 .
the evolution of the wave function is @xmath307 , with the evolution operator @xmath308 .
the reduced density matrix for the system is @xmath309 where @xmath310 , @xmath311 , and we let @xmath312 .
the normalization rule is @xmath313    the kraus operator representation demonstrates the openness and the evolution in time of quantum system .
however , although there is evolution in time , the logical relations between operators remains .
for instance , the relation @xmath314 does not depends on time .
below , we show that this method is consistent with the ch method .
the physical role of the evolution operator @xmath308 can be substituted by the class operator @xmath315 , the state of the system at time @xmath316 is @xmath317 , where @xmath304 is the initial state . we know
@xmath318 and @xmath319 thus @xmath320 , which is the same as the normalization of the kraus operator , physically .
_ interacting faculties_. the concept of `` potentiality '' , originated from aristotle @xcite , is quite widely studied in qm .
the actuality ( reality ) and potentiality were systematically studied recently , where the authors stated that potentiality could be a mode of existence , and the concept of `` faculty '' was introduced to replace `` entity '' @xcite .
the faculty describes a level which does not pertain to things but rather to potential actions .
possessing a faculty offers the ability to do something . according to our understanding , yet , the concept of faculty is the analogy of potentiality .
this approach relates to the property @xmath321 in section [ sec : properties ] , yet it does not aim to provide the direct physical meaning of wave function and the superposition principle .
consider the mixtures of bell states latexmath:[$|\psi\rangle=(|01\rangle \pm
@xmath3 is the `` cross '' state , and @xmath323 is the `` direct '' state . so the mixture ( ensemble ) can be viewed as the mixture of two kinds of systems .
the classical analogy is , e.g. , the mixture of two kinds of gases .
there exists the center of mass for each of the gases , so the problem can be simplified as the two - body problem in classical mechanics , as shown in fig . [ fig.red](a ) .
the two objects @xmath324 and @xmath325 exist in the configuration space , the coordinates are @xmath326 and @xmath327 , respectively .
the kinetic energy is @xmath328 where @xmath329 is the total mass , @xmath330 is the reduced mass , @xmath331 is the coordinate of the mass center of the system , and @xmath332 is the relative displacement between the two objects .
now , consider velocity @xmath333 .
as we know , there exists the maximum speed as the light speed @xmath334 .
let @xmath335 , thus , the set of speed @xmath336 forms the probability space with @xmath337 .
the kinetic energy is written as @xmath338    consider the mixtures of bell states .
the density matrix can be written as @xmath339    the entanglement of the mixture is @xmath340 where by introducing the probability amplitude @xmath341 , @xmath342 , @xmath343 , and @xmath344 is the reduced entanglement .
the situation is depicted in fig . [ fig.red](b ) .    by comparison ,
the entanglement is the analogy of mass , the probability is the analogy of @xmath345 .    for high - dimensional and many - body problems , there is no obvious form of reduced mass , also the reduced entanglement .
yet , we can apply the rough bi - party partition to deduce the apparent reduced mass or entanglement .
however , we have to say , there are significant differences .
for instance , the quantum probabilities @xmath346 and @xmath347 each exist in the probability space , and also they together exist in another probability space .
but , the classical speed ( square ) @xmath348 and @xmath349 do not exist in the probability space with each other .
this relates to the problem of special relativity , this simple mode may have implication for the relation between qm and relativity .
according to our study , entanglement and quantum information ( entropy ) are different .
entanglement is the shared coherence by the parties of the entangled state . also , we find nonorthogonality is the shared coherence within the local states of each party of the whole state .
quantum information ( @xmath350 ) is the improved form of classical information ( correlation ) ( @xmath351 ) due to nonorthogonality ( @xmath352 ) or entanglement ( @xmath166 ) .
thus , @xmath350 can be the function of @xmath352 or entanglement @xmath166 . here , we compare our definition with the usual entanglement measure
.    _ entanglement of formation . _ in qiqc , the mixtures of bell states , i.e. , ensemble of qubits , are often prepared , the entanglement of formation , also cost and distillation are studied @xcite .
the entanglement of formation , which measures quantum information instead of entanglement , is defined as @xmath353 and the density matrix is written as @xmath354 as follows .
( b ) . `` computation basis '' @xmath361 , @xmath362 , @xmath363 , @xmath364 .
the qubit is written as @xmath365 , and concurrence is @xmath366 it is easy to see that the basis in case ( a ) can be viewed as the special case of ( b ) .
schmidt basis @xmath367 .
the qubit is written as @xmath368 , with @xmath369 , the density matrix is @xmath370 and concurrence is @xmath371 the schmidt basis can be rotated to the `` computation basis '' in case ( b ) by the local unitary transformation @xmath372 @xcite .
the above three kinds of basis give the same results of concurrence .
the entanglement of formation is defined as @xmath373 , where the binary entropy function @xmath374 .
we can form the entropy - concurrence matrix ( @xmath375 ) as follows @xmath376 then , it is obvious that the entropy @xmath377 describes the property of the diagonal elements ( population ) , and the concurrence @xmath378 describes the non - diagonal elements ( coherence ) .
_ negativity and robustness .
_ for pure state , the definition of negativity @xcite is the same with our definition of the degree of entanglement .
negativity is usually viewed as the absolute value of the sum of the negative eigenvalues of @xmath379 @xmath380 where @xmath381 is the negative eigenvalues .    in deed , the negative eigenvalues are the results of the shared coherence of the entangled state . for pure qubit ,
the negativity is the same with concurrence , that is to say , the definition of negativity is more general than concurrence for bi - party pure state .
the robustness @xcite is the twice of the negativity for pure state .
physically , it describes the robustness of the entanglement to the minimal amount of external classical noise .
the role of noise is to disturb and destroy the coherence .
physically , the robustness can describe the shared coherence , thus give the right quantity of entanglement .
however , it is not easy to calculate since it is the indirect way to measure entanglement .
in addition , we discuss a little of the physical meaning of concurrence and negativity for the mixed state condition .
it is well - known that the two are often different for mixed state , though the same for the pure state case .
the physical reason is quite clear : they are the results of two different entanglement witness ( operator ) @xcite .
physically , in the mixed state there can be nonorthogonality , which can influence concurrence and negativity without being detected . that is to say , it is not proper to generalize concurrence and negativity to the mixed state , since the result is not necessarily entanglement .        where the set @xmath383 can be taken as the set of separable states , states with positive partial transpose , nondistillable states , etc .
the quantum discord @xcite and squashed entanglement @xcite , which we have studied in ref .
@xcite , can be viewed as the relative entropy .
physically , @xmath384 does not quantify entanglement directly , yet it relates to entanglement . the relation between @xmath384 and entanglement also nonorthogonality
can not be deduced easily especially for mixed state , since the detailed structure of the mixed state and the distribution of coherence are not clear . as a result ,
the relative entropy is only an effective way to measure quantum information instead of entanglement .
99 d. bohm , _ quantum theory _
( prentice - hall , inc . , englewood cliffs , new jersey , 1951 ) .
m. jammer , _ the philosophy of quantum mechanics _
( wiley , new york , 1974 ) .
j. s. bell , _ speakable and unspeakable in quantum mechanics _ ( cambridge university press , cambridge , england , 1987 ) .
m. a. nielsen and i. l. chuang , _ quantum computation and quantum information _
( cambridge university press , cambridge , england , 2000 ) .
w. h. zurek , rev .
* 75 * , 715 ( 2003 ) .
m. schlosshauer , rev .
* 76 * , 1267 ( 2004 ) . c. g. timpson , arxiv : quant - ph/0611187 .
a. einstein , b. podolsky , and n. rosen , phys .
rev . * 47 * , 777 ( 1935 ) .
e. schrdinger , phys .
rev . * 28 * , 1049 ( 1926 ) .
d. bohm , phys .
rev . * 85 * , 166 ( 1952 ) .
j. von neumann , _ mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics _ ( princeton university press , 1955 ) .
h. everett , rev .
* 29 * , 454 ( 1957 ) ; b. s. dewitt and n. graham , _ the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics _ ( princeton university press , princeton nj , 1973 ) ; d. deutsch , int
* 24 * , 1 ( 1985 ) .
m. gell - mann and j. b. hartle , in _ complexity , entropy and the physics of information _ , santa fe institute studies in the science of complexity vol .
viii edited by w. zurek ( addison - wesley , redwood city , ca , 1990 ) ; phys
d * 47 * , 3345 ( 1993 ) ; r. b. griffiths , j. stat .
phys . * 36 * , 219 ( 1984 ) ; r. omns , rev .
64 * , 339 ( 1992 ) ; h. f. dowker and j. j. halliwell , phys .
d * 46 * , 1580 ( 1992 ) ; j. j. halliwell , phys . rev .
d * 58 * , 105015 ( 1998 ) ; phys .
* 83 * , 2481 ( 1999 ) .
r. clifton , j. bub , and h. halvorson , found .
phys . * 33 * , 1561 ( 2003 ) ; g. brassard , nature phys .
* 1 * , 2 ( 2005 ) ; j. oppenheim and b. reznik , arxiv : quant - ph/0312149 ; g. m. dariano , arxiv : quant - ph/1012.0535 ; jae - weon lee , arxiv : hep - th/1011.1657 ; p. goyal , arxiv : quant - ph/0702124 ; arxiv : quant - ph/0702149 .              as bohr said : `` there is no quantum world .
there is only an abstract quantum physical description .
it is wrong to think that the task of physics is to find out how nature is .
physics concerns what we can say about nature . '' from n. bohr , _ atomic theory and the description of nature _ ( cambridge univ . press , new york , 1934 ) .
e. calzetta and f. d. mazzitelli , phys .
d * 42 * , 4066 ( 1990 ) ; f. lombardo and f. d. mazzitelli , phys .
d * 53 * , 2001 ( 1996 ) .
s. habib , y. kluger , e. mottola , and j. p. paz , phys .
rev . lett . * 76 * , 4660 ( 1996 ) ; g. mahajan and t. padmanabhan , gen .
rel . grav .
* 40 * , 661 ( 2008 ) ; a. giraud and j. serreau , phys .
lett . * 104 * , 230405 ( 2010 ) .
r. j. glauber , phys .
rev . * 131 * , 2766 ( 1963 ) ; a. miranowicz _
et al . _ ,
a * 82 * , 013824 ( 2010 ) , and references therein .
g. vidal , j. mod . opt . * 47 * , 355 ( 2000 ) ; m. b. plenio and s. virmani , quantum inf . comput . * 7 * , 1 ( 2007 ) ; r. horodecki , p. horodecki , m. horodecki , and k. horodecki , rev .
* 81 * , 865 ( 2009 ) .
a. aspect , j. dalibard , and g. roger , phys .
lett . * 49 * , 1804 ( 1982 ) .    c. h. bennett and g. brassard ,
_ proceedings of the ieee international conference on computers , systems and signal processing _
( ieee computer society , new york , 1984 ) , pp .
175 - 179 . c. h. bennett , phys .
68 * , 3121 ( 1992 ) .
f. grosshans _ et al .
_ , nature * 421 * , 238 ( 2003 ) .
lo , x. ma , k. chen , phys .
lett . * 94 * , 230504 ( 2005 ) .
j. a. wheeler and k. ford , _ geons , black holes @xmath385 quantum foam : a life in physics _ ( new york : w.w .
norton @xmath385 co , 1998 )
. j. a. wheeler , in w. zurek , editor , _ complexity , entropy and the physics of information _ , pages 3 - 28 .
( addison - wesley , redwood city , ca 1990 ) .
r. landauer , proc .
workshop on physics and computation physcomp 92 ( ieee comp .
press , los alamitos , 1993 ) pp . 1 - 4 .
d. m. greenberger , m. a. horne , and a. zeilinger , _ going beyond bell s theorem in bell s theorem , and conceptions of the universe _
( kluwer academic , dordrecht , 1989 ) ; phys . today * 8 * , 22 ( 1993 ) ; d. m. greenberger , m. a. horne , a. shimony , and a. zeilinger , am . j. phys . * 58 * , 1131 ( 1990 ) .
a. peres , phys .
lett . * 77 * , 1413 ( 1996 ) . g. vidal and r. f. werner , phys .
a * 65 * , 032314 ( 2002 ) . c. h. bennett , h. j. bernstein , s. popescu , b. schumacher , phys .
a * 53 * , 2046 ( 1996 )
. s. hill and w. k. wootters , phys .
lett . * 78 * , 5022 ( 1997 ) ; w. k. wootters , phys . rev .
* 80 * , 2245 ( 1998 ) . c. h. bennett , d. p. divincenzo , j. a. smolin , and w. k. wootters , phys .
a * 54 * , 3824 ( 1996 ) .
v. vedral and m. b. plenio , phys . rev .
a * 57 * , 1619 ( 1998 ) g. vidal and r. tarrach , phys .
a * 59 * , 141 ( 1999 ) .
m. steiner , phys .
a * 67 * , 054305 ( 2003 ) .
h. ollivier and w. h. zurek , phys .
lett . * 88 * , 017901 ( 2001 ) ; w. h. zurek , phys .
a * 67 * , 012320 ( 2003 ) ; l. henderson and v. vedral , j. phys .
a * 34 * , 6899 ( 2001 ) .
s. luo , phys .
a * 77 * , 022301 ( 2008 ) .
m. christandl and a. winter , j. math .
phys.(n.y . )
* 45 * , 829 ( 2004 )
. f. g. s. l. brando , phys .
a * 72 * , 022310 ( 2005 ) .
o. gittsovich , o. ghne , p. hyllus , and j. eisert , phys .
a * 78 * , 052319 ( 2008 ) . m. lewenstein and a. sanpera , phys .
lett . * 80 * , 2261 ( 1998 ) .