After listening of some lectures of Leonard Susskind about black holes, he mentioned that conservation of information is one of the foundations of physics. After searching the web I cannot seem to find how we came up with this theory. Could someone explain how we know this is true and/or how did we come to this conclusion?
2 Answers
Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me a trivial consequence of quantum system evolution by means of unitary transforms and, thus, reversibility.
- 17,328
In a quantum context, or more generally in a statistical context, one may say that conservation of information is related to the fact that the sum of probabilities is $1$
For instance, suppose that the interactions of 2 particles $A$ and $A'$ could only produce these same particles $A$ and $A'$, but with different characteristics (momenta, polarizations, etc...), so a interaction $A_1+A'_1 \to A_2+A'_2$
We may consider that the initial state is $|i\rangle = |i_1\rangle |i'_1\rangle$, while the final state could be written : $|f\rangle = \sum\limits_{f_2,f'_2} A (i_1,i'_1, f_2, f'_2) |f_2\rangle |f'_2\rangle$.
Here, $A (i_1,i'_1, f_2, f'_2)$ represents some complex probability amplitude, but which one exactly ?
Conservation of information, means that the initial particles cannot disappear (by hypothesis, we said that the final state is always composed of a 2-particle state, so the final state cannot be "nothing" or zero), the laws of probability tell us that the sum of the probabilities is equal to $1$, that is :
$\sum\limits_{f_2,f'_2} |A (i_1,i'_1, f_2, f'_2)|^2=1$
So $A (i_1,i'_1, f_2, f'_2)$ really represents the probability amplitude to find the final system in the state $|f_2\rangle |f'_2\rangle$
If the sum of the probabilities were not equal to $1$, you will not be able to predict anything, physics will not be predictive, and so would not be a science.
- 18,043