CATEGORICAL FOUNDATION

OF QUANTUM MECHANICS AND STRING THEORY

A. Nicolaidis
arXiv:0812.1946v1 [hep-th] 10 Dec 2008

Theoretical Physics Department

University of Thessaloniki
54124 Thessaloniki, Greece
[email protected]

December 11, 2008

Abstract
The unification of Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity remains the primary
goal of Theoretical Physics, with string theory appearing as the only plausible unifying
scheme. In the present work, in a search of the conceptual foundations of string theory,
we analyze the relational logic developed by C. S. Peirce in the late nineteenth century.
The Peircean logic has the mathematical structure of a category with the relation
Rij among two individual terms Si and Sj , serving as an arrow (or morphism). We
introduce a realization of the corresponding categorical algebra of compositions, which
naturally gives rise to the fundamental quantum laws, thus indicating category theory
as the foundation of Quantum Mechanics. The same relational algebra generates
a number of group structures, among them W . The group W is embodied and
realized by the matrix models, themselves closely linked with string theory. It is
suggested that relational logic and in general category theory may provide a new
paradigm, within which to develop modern physical theories.

The raison d etre of physics is to understand the wonderful variety of nature in a

unified way. A glance at the history of physics is revealing: the unification of terrestrial
and celestial Mechanics by Newton in the 17th century; of optics with the theories of
electricity and magnetism by Maxwell in the 19th century; of space-time geometry and
the theory of gravitation by Einstein in the years 1905 to 1916; and of thermodynamics
and atomic physics through the advent of Quantum Mechanics in the 1920s [1]. The
next leap in this on-going process is the unification of the two pillars of modern physics,
quantum mechanics and general relativity. String theory, in this respect, appears as the
most promising example of a candidate unified theory [2].
Strings emerged in the study of strong interactions, modelling the flux tubes between
quark-antiquark pairs in hadronic collisions, in the Regge limit, nicely described by the
Veneziano amplitude [3], which can be reproduced from a relativistic string theory [4].

1
In a similar vein, the hadronic structure functions in the small x-Bjorken limit are most
conveniently described via colored dipoles [5]. A precise and profound analysis of a string
dual of QCD has been provided by t Hooft [6]. t Hooft considered a generalization of QCD
by replacing the gauge group SU(3) by SU(N). The limit N with gY2 M N kept
fixed, leads to a topological expansion. The leading order (in 1/N ) Feynmann diagrams
can be drawn on a planar surface and higher order diagrams on surfaces of higher genus.
In a most interesting development an holographic analogy [7, 8] has been established
between matter or open strings on a D-brane and gravity or closed strings in the bulk [9].
We realize that string theory is a tantalizing rich theory, since on one hand is connected
to the dynamics of the space-time continuum, and on the other hand the discrete modes
of string vibrations represent the totality of elementary particles.
Every single physical theory is corroborated or disproved by experiment. The early
hope of making direct contact between experiment and string theory has long since dissi-
pated, and there is as yet no experimental program for finding even indirect manifestations
of underlying string degrees of freedom in nature [10]. Particle/string theorists under these
conditions focused their attention in searching for the internal coherence and the physical
principles governing string theory. This search is of paramount importance. While in
developing general relativity Einstein was guided by the principle of equivalence, we are
lacking a foundational principle for either string theory or quantum mechanics [1, 11]. In
the present work we suggest that a form of logic, relational logic developed by C. S. Peirce
in the second half of the 19th century, may serve as the conceptual foundation of quantum
mechanics and string theory.
Peirce, a most original mind, made important contributions in science, philosophy,
semiotics and notably in logic, where he invented and elaborated novel system of logical
syntax and fundamental logical concepts. The starting point is the binary relation Si RSj
between the two individual terms (subjects) Sj and Si . In a short hand notation we
represent this relation by Rij . Relations may be composed: whenever we have relations
of the form Rij , Rjl , a third transitive relation Ril emerges following the rule [12, 13]

Rij Rkl = jk Ril (1)

In ordinary logic the individual subject is the starting point and it is defined as a member
of a set. Peirce, in an original move, considered the individual as the aggregate of all its
relations X
Si = Rij . (2)
j

It is easy to verify that the individual Si thus defined is an eigenstate of the Rii relation

Rii Si = Si . (3)

The relations Rii are idempotent

2
Rii = Rii (4)
and they span the identity X
Rii = 1 (5)
i

2
The Peircean logical structure bears great resemblance to category theory, a remarkably
rich branch of mathematics developed by Eilenberg and Maclane in 1945 [14]. In cat-
egories the concept of transformation (transition, map, morphism or arrow) enjoys an
autonomous, primary and irreducible role. A category [15] consists of objects A, B, C,...
and arrows (morphisms) f, g, h,... . Each arrow f is assigned an object A as domain and
an object B as codomain, indicated by writing f : A B. If g is an arrow g : B C
with domain B, the codomain of f, then f and g can be composed to give an arrow
gof : A C. The composition obeys the associative law ho(gof ) = (hog)of . For each
object A there is an arrow 1A : A A called the identity arrow of A. The analogy with
the relational logic of Peirce is evident, Rij stands as an arrow, the composition rule is
manifested in eq. (1) and the identity arrow for A Si is Rii . There is an important
literature on possible ways the category notions can be applied to physics; specifically to
quantising space-time [16], attaching a formal language to a physical system [17], studying
topological quantum field theories [18, 19].
Rij may receive multiple interpretations: as a transition from the j state to the i state,
as a measurement process that rejects all impinging systems except those in the state j
and permits only systems in the state i to emerge from the apparatus, as a transformation
replacing the j state by the i state. We proceed to a representation of Rij

Rij = |ri i hrj | (6)

where state hri | is the dual of the state |ri i and they obey the orthonormal condition

hri |rj i = ij (7)

It is immediately seen that our representation satisfies the composition rule eq. (1). The
completeness, eq.(5), takes the form
X
|ri i hri | = 1 (8)
n

All relations remain satisfied if we replace the state |ri i by |i i, where

1 X
|i i = |ri i hrn | (9)
N n

with N the number of states. Thus we verify Peirces suggestion, eq. (2), and the state |ri i
is derived as the sum of all its interactions with the other states. Rij acts as a projection,
transferring from one r state to another r state

Rij |rk i = jk |ri i . (10)

We may think also of another property characterizing our states and define a corresponding
operator
Qij = |qi i hqj | (11)
with
Qij |qk i = jk |qi i . (12)

3
and X
|qi i hqi | = 1. (13)
n

Successive measurements of the q-ness and r-ness of the states is provided by the operator

Rij Qkl = |ri i hrj |qk i hql | = hrj |qk i Sil (14)

with
Sil = |ri i hql |. (15)
Considering the matrix elements of an operator A as Anm = hrn |A |rm i we find for the
trace X
T r(Sil ) = hrn |Sil |rn i = hql |ri i . (16)
n

From the above relation we deduce

T r(Rij ) = ij . (17)

Any operator can be expressed as a linear superposition of the Rij

X
A= Aij Rij (18)
i,j

with
Aij = T r(ARji ). (19)
The individual states can be redefined

|ri i eii |ri i (20)

ii
|qi i e |qi i (21)

without affecting the corresponding composition laws. However the overlap number hri |qj i
changes and therefore we need an invariant formulation for the transition |ri i |qj i. This
is provided by the trace of the closed operation Rii Qjj Rii

T r(Rii Qjj Rii ) p(qj , ri ) = | hri |qj i |2 . (22)

The completeness relation, eq. (13), guarantees that p(qj , ri ) may assume the role of a
probability since X
p(qj , ri ) = 1. (23)
j

We discover that starting from the relational logic of Peirce we obtain all the essential
laws of Quantum Mechanics. Our derivation underlines the outmost relational nature
of Quantum Mechanics and goes in parallel with the analysis of the quantum algebra of
microscopic measurement presented by Schwinger [20].

4
 Further insights are obtained if we consider the simplified case of only two states
(i=1,2). We define
1
Rz = (R11 R22 ) (24)
2
and
R+ = R12 R = R21 . (25)
These operators satisfy the SU(2) commutation relations

[Rz , R ] = R [R+ , R ] = 2Rz (26)

and the quadratic Casimir operator

1
R2 = Rz2 + (R+ R + R R+ ) (27)
2
can be written as
1 1
R2 = ( + 1)1. (28)
2 2
The underlying dynamics is analogous to an angular momentum 1/2 particle and the
SU(2) algebra is realized in a way reminiscent of the Schwinger scheme [21, 22]. A matrix
representation of Rij , for the two-states case, is provided by
   
1 0 0 0
R11 = R22 = (29)
0 0 0 1
   
0 1 0 0
R12 = R21 = (30)
0 0 1 0

The matrices
 
1 s
exp(sR12 ) = (31)
0 1
 
1 0
exp(tR21 ) = (32)
t 1

perform shear transformations in a two-dimensional space [23], while the matrix

 
e 0
exp[(R11 R22 )] = (33)
0 e

generates squeeze transformations.

For the general case of N available states the Rij satisfy the W algebra

[Rij , Rkl ] = jk Ril li Rkj . (34)

The W algebras are bosonic extensions of the Virasoro algebra, containing generating
currents of higher conformal-spin, in addition to the spin-2 stress tensor of Virasoro (for

5
a review see [24]). They are linked to the area-preserving diffeomorphisms of two dimen-
sional surfaces [25, 26]. W symmetries are exhibited by a number of systems, among
them, QCD2 [27, 28], gravity in two-dimensions [29], bosonic string in four-dimensional
Minkowski space [30]. We may proceed to a pictorial representation of the operation Rij .
Each distinct state i is represented by a specific line (solid, dashed,...), with a downward
(upward) arrow attached to the annihilated (created) state. In this sense we picture R12
by a double line, fig 1, while the composition rule, for example R12 R21 = R11 , is repre-

R12

Figure 1: The relation R12 . Solid (dashed) line stands for the state 1 (2). A downward
(upward) arrow is attached to an impinging (emerging) state.

sented by the diagram of fig. 2. The similarity with string theory, string joining and string
R11

R 12 R 21

Figure 2: Pictorial representation of the composition rule R12 R21 = R11

splitting, is obvious. The cubic-string interaction may be repeated an indefinite number

of times, with vertices connected together and giving rise to different forms of polygons
(see fig. 3). These types of structures can be generated by a random matrix model [10]
1
Z
Z = [dM ]exp{N tr( M 2 + gM 3 )} (35)
2
where M are N N random matrices. A perturbative expansion of this integral leads
to t Hooft-type Feynman diagrams with cubic vertices. Each such diagram specifies a
unique surface topology, with faces arbitrary n-gons. The corresponding dual lattice has n
lines meeting at a point but the faces are triangles. The result is a triangulated Riemann

6
Figure 3: Random partition of a surface. Each triangle (dashed lines) is dual to a cubic
vertex.

surface (fig. 3). An expansion of Z in inverse powers of N is equivalent to a topological

expansion, selecting diagrams of specific genus h

X
Z= Zh (g)N 22h . (36)
h=0

As g is increased successive contributions Zh diverge at the same critical value g = gc .

The partition function can be reorganized into
X
Z= Fh gs2h2 (37)
h

where the renormalized string coupling gs is given by

1
gs = 2 (38)
N (g gs ) 2

with the critical exponent. The continuum two dimensional string theory is obtained in
the double scaling limit N , g gc with gs kept fixed [31].
Modern physics is marked by two impressive theoretical constructions, quantum me-
chanics and string theory. Each of them is an elaborate and detailed theory providing
understanding or insights to a host of different problems. Yet, we are lacking a concep-
tual foundation for these theories. In the present work we have indicated that a form
of logic, relational logic developed by C. S. Peirce, may serve as the foundation of both
quantum mechanics and string theory. The starting point is that the concept of relation
is an irreducible basic datum. All other terms or objects are defined in terms of relations,
transformations, morphisms, arrows, structures. Usually we adhere to mathematical con-
siderations derived within set theory. A set is deprived of any structure, being a plurality of

7
structureless individuals, qualified only by membership (or non membership). Accordingly
a set-theoretic enterprise is analytic, atomistic, arithmetic. On the other hand a relational
or categorical formulation is bound to be synthetic, holistic, geometric. It appears that
quantum theory, string theory and eventually the physical theories to come, are better
conceived, analyzed and comprehended within a new paradigm inspired by relational and
categorical principles.

Acknowledgement: Part of the present work was presented during the workshop on Re-
lational Ontology, held at the Academy of Athens (October 14 - 17 2005) and organized
by the Templeton Foundation.

References
[1] Steven Weinberg, A Unified Phusics by 2050?,Sci. Amer., pp. 36-43, Dec. 1999

[2] M. B. Green, J. H. Schwarz and E. Witten, Superstring Theory, Cambridge University

Press, 1987

[3] G. Veneziano, Il Nuovo Cim. 57A, pp.190-197 (1968)

[4] J. Polchinski, String theory, Vol 1: An introduction to the bosonic string, Cambridge
University Press, 1998

[5] L. Lipatov, Phys. Rept. 286, 131-198 (1997)

[6] G. t Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B72, 461 (1974)

[7] L. Susskind, J. Math. Phys. 36, 6377 (1995)

[8] G. t Hooft, In Salamfestschrift: a collection of talks, World Scientific Series in 20th

Century Physics, vol. 4, ed. A. Ali, J. Ellis and S. Randjbar-Daemi (World Scientific,
1993), gr-qc/9310026.

[9] J. Maldacena, Adv.Theor.Math.Phys. 2 , 231-252 (1998)

[10] P. Ginsparg, Matrix models of 2d gravity, Trieste Lectures, hep-th/9112013

[11] Edward Witten, Duality, Spacetime and Quantum Mechanics, Physics Today, pp.
28-33, May 1997.

[12] C. S. Peirce, Description of a notation for the logic of relatives, resulting from an
amplification of the conceptions of Booles calculus of logic, Memoirs of the American
Academy of Sciences 9, pp 317-378 (1870)

[13] C. S. Peirce, On the algebra of logic, American Journal of Mathematics 3, pp 15-57

(1880)

8
[14] S. Eilenberg and S. Maclane, General theory of natural equivalences, Transactions of
the American Mathematical Society, 58, pp 239-294 (1945)

[15] F. Lawvere and S. Schanuel, Conceptual Mathematics: A first indroduction to cate-

gories, Cambridge University Press (1997)

[16] C. Isham, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 7, 331-367 (2003)

[17] A. Doring and C. Isham, A topos foundation for Theoretical Physics: I. Formal
language for physics, quant-ph/0703060 preprint

[18] J. Baez and J. Dolan, J. Math. Phys. 36, 6073 (1995)

[19] J. Baez, Quantum quandaries: A category-theoretic perspective, quant-ph/0404040

preprint, to appear in Structural Foundations of Quantum Gravity, Oxford University
Press

[20] J. Schwinger, Proc. N.A. S. 45, 1542 (1959)

[21] J. Schwinger, On Angular Momentum, in Quantum Theory of Angular Momentum,

edited by L. C. Biedenharn and H. Van Dam, Academic Press, New York 1965; p.
229

[22] J. J. Sakurai, Modern Quantum Mechanics, Addison-Wesley, New York, 1990; p. 217

[23] Y. S.Kim and E. P. Wigner, Am. J. Phys. 58, 439 (1990)

[24] X. Shen, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A7, 6953 (1992)

[25] I. Bakas, Phys. Lett. B228, 57(1989)

[26] E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B373, 187 (1992)

[27] S. Wadia, W algebra and geometric formulation of QCD2 , hep-th/9411213

[28] A. Dhar, G. Mandal and S. Wadia, Phys. Lett. B329, 15 (1994)

[29] A. Polyakov, Mod. Phys. Lett. A2, 893 (1987)

[30] I. Bakas, Phys.Lett. B319, 457-465 (1993)

[31] E. Brezin and V. Kazakov, Phys. Lett. B236, 144 (1990); M. Douglas and S. Shenker,
Nucl. Phys. B335, 635 (1990); D. Gross and A. Migdal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 127
(1990).