Conditional uniqueness theorem identifies amplitude-square representation in interference systems, suggesting structural implications.
T63 establishes a conditional uniqueness theorem for the interference and amplitude-square structures developed in T61 and T62. Starting from the reduced two-channel interference form,\[Pₜₒₜ=P_1+P_2+G(P_1,P_2,ΔΩ),\]The theorem analyzes the structural constraints imposed by symmetry, continuity, axis-vanishing behaviour, degree-1 homogeneity, and first-harmonic rotational structure generated by the reduced antisymmetric operator algebra. Under these assumptions, the interference contribution is forced into the normal form\[G(P_1,P_2,ΔΩ)=2√P_1P_2\,sin(ΔΩ),\]yielding the exact amplitude-square representation\[Pₜₒₜ=|√P_1+eiφ√P_2|^2.\]The theorem therefore shows that, within the stated structural class, the Born-compatible amplitude-square form is uniquely selected by the reduced interference geometry together with the harmonic structure induced by the rotational generator satisfying \(A^2=-I\). T63 does not derive full quantum mechanics, measurement theory, Hilbert-space axioms, or probabilistic interpretation from first principles. The result is a conditional uniqueness theorem for the algebraic normal form of two-channel interference under the stated assumptions. In particular, the homogeneity assumption is essential: without it, uniqueness does not hold. The theorem further clarifies that the complex amplitude representation is obtained from the interference structure rather than independently postulated. Status: solid for the conditional uniqueness of the amplitude-square normal form under the stated symmetry, homogeneity, and harmonic assumptions; conditional on the separability and structural assumptions defining the interference class; speculative for any claim of a complete derivation of quantum probability theory or the Born rule from Q5 geometry alone.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Craig Edwin Holdway (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: