Quantum mechanics over real numbers fully reproduces standard quantum theory

Abstract

Standard quantum mechanics employs complex Hilbert spaces, but whether complex numbers are fundamental or merely convenient has long been debated. For decades, real-valued equivalents were considered mathematically possible but cumbersome. However, a highly cited 2021 result claimed that any quantum theory based on real numbers is experimentally falsifiable via network Bell experiments. Yet, it remains an open question whether this falsification applies to all real-valued theories. Here we show that this conclusion rests on an incomplete real formulation, and we present a rigorous real-valued framework that perfectly reproduces all predictions of standard quantum mechanics. We demonstrate that the standard real tensor product (R) used in previous no-go theorems is algebraically incompatible with the rich structure of conventional quantum mechanics. We present a real framework based on Kähler space and prove that it is exactly isomorphic to established quantum mechanics via an explicit bijection γ. The isomorphism extends to composite systems through a symplectic composition rule that replaces the Kronecker product. Consequently, our formulation achieves the maximal CHSH3 violation of 62 using purely real variables, demonstrating that the no-go theorem is specific to a particular real representation of states and operators and to the composition rule R built upon it, neither of which extends to the present Kähler framework. These results demonstrate that complex numbers are not fundamentally required by nature; rather, they encode a deeper real geometric structure that governs quantum interference and entanglement, settling this long debate.

0

Turn this paper into a full lesson

ArcXiv compiles a staged curriculum from this paper: 8-12 lessons across beginner → advanced, synthesised section guides, visuals, flashcards, a quiz, exercises, and on-demand deep dives per section. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…