 classical behavior from the laws of quantum mechanics are available in many quantum mechanics texts. One popular approach is based on Ehrenfest’s theorem relating the acceleration of the expected value of position to the expected value of the force: $$m\ \frac{d^2\langle x\rangle}{dt^2} = - \left\langle\frac{\partial
V}{\partial x}\right\rangle\,
\label{oneone}$$ (written here for one-dimensional motion). Ehrenfest’s theorem is true in general, but for certain states, typically narrow wave packets, we may approximately replace the expected value of the force with the force evaluated at the expected value of position, thereby obtaining a classical equation of motion for that expected value: $$m\ \frac{d^2\langle x\rangle}{dt^2} = - \frac{\partial V(\langle x
\rangle)}{\partial x}\.
\label{onetwo}$$ This equation shows that the center of a narrow wave packet moves on an orbit obeying Newton’s laws. More precisely, if we make a succession of position and momentum measurements that are crude enough not to disturb the approximation that allows (1.2) to replace (1.1), the expected values of the results will be correlated by Newton’s deterministic law.

This kind of elementary derivation is inadequate for the type of classical behavior that we hope to discuss in quantum cosmology for the following reasons:

-   The behavior of expected or average values is not enough to define classical behavior. In quantum mechanics, the statement that the moon moves on a classical orbit is properly the statement that, among a set of alternative histories of its position as a function of time, the probability is high for those histories exhibiting the correlations in time implied by Newton’s law of motion and near zero for all others. To discuss classical behavior, therefore, we should be dealing with the probabilities of individual time histories, not with expected or average values.

-   The Ehrenfest theorem derivation deals with the results of “measurements” on an isolated system with a few degrees of freedom. However, in quantum cosmology we are interested in classical behavior in much more general situations, over cosmological stretches of space and time, and over a wide range of subsystems, [*independent*]{} of whether these subsystems are receiving attention from observers. Certainly we imagine that our observations of the moon’s orbit, or a bit of the universe’s expansion, have little to
classical behavior from the laws of quantum mechanics are available in many quantum automobile mechanic textbook. One popular approach is based on Ehrenfest ’s theorem refer the acceleration of the expected value of position to the expect value of the effect: $ $ m\ \frac{d^2\langle x\rangle}{dt^2 } = - \left\langle\frac{\partial 
 V}{\partial x}\right\rangle\, 
 \label{oneone}$$ (written here for one - dimensional gesture). Ehrenfest ’s theorem is true in general, but for sealed states, typically narrow wave packets, we may approximately replace the expect value of the force with the power evaluated at the expected value of military position, thereby obtaining a classical equation of apparent motion for that expected value: $ $ m\ \frac{d^2\langle x\rangle}{dt^2 } = - \frac{\partial V(\langle x 
 \rangle)}{\partial x}\. 
 \label{onetwo}$$ This equation shows that the center field of a narrow wave packet moves on an orbit obeying Newton ’s laws. More precisely, if we cook a succession of position and momentum measurements that are crude enough not to disturb the estimate that allow (1.2) to replace (1.1), the expected values of the results will be correlated by Newton ’s deterministic law. 

 This kind of elementary derivation is inadequate for the type of classical demeanor that we hope to discourse in quantum cosmology for the following reason: 

 -    The demeanor of expected or average values is not enough to define classical behavior. In quantum mechanics, the instruction that the moon moves on a classical orbit is properly the statement that, among a bent of alternative histories of its position as a function of meter, the probability is high for those history exhibiting the correlations in time implied by Newton ’s law of apparent motion and near zero for all others. To discuss classical behavior, consequently, we should be dealing with the probability of individual time histories, not with expect or average value. 

 -    The Ehrenfest theorem derivation deals with the consequence of “ measurements ” on an detached system with a few degree of freedom. However, in quantum cosmology we are concerned in classical behavior in much more cosmopolitan situations, over cosmological stretches of space and time, and over a wide range of subsystems, [ * independent * ] { } of whether these subsystems are receiving attention from perceiver. Certainly we imagine that our observation of the moon ’s orbit, or a bit of the universe ’s expansion, have little to
 clwssical behavior from tht laws of quantum mechanmcs are availabue in many quantum mechanics twxts. Ine popular approach ir based oj Ehrenfwst’s rheorem relating tmz accsperaciin of the expegted value mf position to tfe expected value of the force: $$m\ \frac{q^2\langle x\gangle}{dt^2} = - \lefj\langkq\frad{\iavtial
V}{\partial x}\right\rangle\,
\label{oheone}$$ (wgitten here for ome-dimensional motion). Ehrenvest’d theorem is true ln general, vut sir certain sgates, typibclly narrow wave packets, we may approximatdly rzplace the grpechgd value of vhe fogce with the nprce eealuatec at the expecbed velue of position, thereby mbtaining a classisal equathou of motion for that wxpecteg vanue: $$o\ \frxc{d^2\maigls x\ranhle}{vt^2} = - \frac{\padtial V(\langoe x
\rangle)}{\partial x}\.
\kafvk{onetwo}$$ This equatyog shows that the center of a narrow wavt paciet moves on an orbit oveying Newton’s laws. Mlre precifely, if we make a succession of position and momettum jdasbvcmengw hhat are crude enough not to disturb the apprjsikanion that allows (1.2) to replace (1.1), hhr expected valoes of cge results will be clrrelatgd by Bewton’s dttermonistic law.

This kind of elenentary derinatiin is inadequate flr the type of vlassocal behavior that we hupe fo discuss ln quantuj cosmology for tfe nolnowing rtxsons:

-   The behavyor of ex'ecteb or avefage valuef is not ejough to define classicap behcvior. In quantul mechanics, the statement that vie moon moves ot a classiccl orblt is properly ehe statement jhat, amony a seg of alterhative iistories of its position ws a functioi of time, the provabilith is high for tnose histories exhiviting the correlabions jn time implied by Newton’s law of mogiog wnv neaw zero for aln otferr. To dkscuss claswkcal behavior, therefore, fe sgould be dealing wotm the provabilitiqs of individial time histories, not xith eepectec ot average values.

-   The Ehrenfesf theorem devivation dealf wibh tre results of “measurements” on an isolated system xith a few degrees of feeedom. However, in qoanuum cosmology we awe interevted in classical beyavior in much move general situations, kver cmsmollgical stretches of space and time, and over a wide range of subsystems, [*ineependxne*]{} of whethed thrse slbsvstzms are recxiting attention frpm observers. Certainly we imagiie that ous jbservations of the moon’s ornig, or a bit of the universe’s expansion, have liytle to
classical behavior from the laws of quantum available many quantum texts. One popular theorem the acceleration of expected value of to the expected value of the $$m\ \frac{d^2\langle x\rangle}{dt^2} = - \left\langle\frac{\partial V}{\partial x}\right\rangle\, \label{oneone}$$ (written here for one-dimensional Ehrenfest’s theorem is true in general, but for certain states, typically narrow wave we approximately the value of the force with the force evaluated at the expected value of position, thereby obtaining classical equation of motion for that expected value: \frac{d^2\langle x\rangle}{dt^2} = - V(\langle x \rangle)}{\partial x}\. \label{onetwo}$$ equation that the of narrow packet moves on orbit obeying Newton’s laws. More precisely, if we make a succession of position and momentum measurements that crude enough disturb the that (1.2) replace (1.1), the of the results will be correlated law. This kind of elementary derivation is inadequate the type classical behavior that we hope to in quantum cosmology for the following reasons: - behavior of expected or average values is not enough to define classical behavior. In quantum statement that the moon on a classical is the that, a set alternative histories of its position as a function of time, the is high for those histories exhibiting the correlations in time Newton’s of motion and zero for all others. discuss behavior, therefore, we should with probabilities histories, with or average values. - Ehrenfest theorem derivation deals with results of “measurements” on few degrees of freedom. However, in quantum cosmology are interested in classical behavior in much general situations, over cosmological stretches of space and time, and over a range of of whether these subsystems are receiving attention from Certainly we imagine that observations of the moon’s orbit, or a bit of universe’s have little
 classical behavior from the lAws of quantUm mecHanIcs ArE avaIlabLe in many quantuM MechAnics texts. One popular apProacH iS BaseD On ehrenFest’s thEOrEM RelAtInG thE aCCeLeratIon Of the exPected valuE of PoSition to the eXPeCted value oF thE force: $$m\ \frac{d^2\LanGle x\raNgLe}{dT^2} = - \Left\lAngLe\fraC{\partiAL
V}{\partIal x}\right\RaNGle\,
\labEL{oneone}$$ (WRItTen hEre for one-dimensioNAl MOtion). Ehrenfest’S theorEm IS tRUE in GenEral, but for CeRtain STates, tyPIcALLY naRRow wave packetS, we may approXImaTely rePlAce THe expeCted vAlUE of The force witH the Force evalUated aT The expeCTed valuE of posItiOn, tHereBY oBtAinInG A clASsIcaL EquAtion of mOtIoN for tHat eXPECTed vAluE: $$m\ \frAc{d^2\laNgle x\rangle}{dt^2} = - \FraC{\parTIal v(\langLe x
\raNgle)}{\PaRtial X}\.
\label{OnetwO}$$ THis equation showS thaT the centeR of A nArrOw Wave pACket moVes On aN orbit oBeying NEWtoN’s LAWS. MOre precisely, if we maKe A SUcCession oF positIOn AnD Momentum MeAsuRemeNTS that Are cRUdE enough nOt to diSTuRb The apprOxImatioN tHat AllOws (1.2) to REplaCe (1.1), the eXpected vAlues OF the results wilL Be correlated bY neWTOn’S DeteRmiNistic law.

ThIs kiND of eLemeNTaRy dERivatIon is InADeQUate for the type of claSsIcal beHavioR that we hope to Discuss in qUANTum cosmoLogy FOr THe following reaSons:

-   THe behavior OF expecteD or avErage valUes is not eNOUgh to defIne ClaSsiCal BEHaVior. In quantum MEChanIcS, the staTemEnt that The MooN moVes On A classicaL orbit is PrOpErLy The StateMEnt that, aMoNg a SeT of AlterNAtive hIstorIes oF iTs POsiTion as a FUnCTIon oF tImE, the ProBaBilitY is hIGh fOr those Histories ExhIBitiNg ThE correlAtions in time iMpLied by NewtOn’S laW of motION and near Zero for all others. To discuSS classiCal BehavIor, tHerefore, wE shOuld be DeaLIng witH the prObabiLiTieS OF indiVIDuAl tImE histories, NOT wiTh expEcTed oR averagE values.

-   The EhrenfesT TheOrem derivatioN deAls wITH tHe rESuLTs oF “mEAsuREMents” on an isolatEd system wiTh A FeW degrees of FReeDoM. HoweveR, in quanTum coSMology wE are interEsted in clAsSicaL BEhaVior in much More geneRal situatIOns, ovER cOsmolOgiCal strEtCheS of spAce and TIme, And ovEr a widE rAnge of SubsyStEms, [*indepEndent*]{} of whether these subSystemS are rEceIving atteNtiON frOm observeRs. CeRtainly we iMagIne That oUr oBServaTionS Of The MOon’s oRbit, OR a bit of thE UnIveRSE’s Expansion, haVE LIttLe to
 classical behavior from t he laws of  quan tum  me ch anic s ar e available in many  quantum mechanics tex ts. O ne popu l ar  appr oach is ba s e d o nEh ren fe s t’ s the ore m relat ing the ac cel er ation of the ex pected val ueof positiontothe ex pe cte d  valu e o f the  force :  $$m\\frac{d^2 \l a ngle x \ rangle} { d t^ 2} =  - \left\langle\f r ac { \partial
V}{\p artial  x } \r i g ht\ ran gle\,
\lab el {oneo n e}$$ (w r it t e n  he r e for one-dim ensional mo t ion ). Ehr en fes t ’s the oremis tru e in genera l, b ut for ce rtains tates,t ypicall y narr owwav e pa c ke ts , w em aya pp rox i mat ely repl ac ethe e xpec t e d valu e o f th e for ce with the f orc e ev a lua ted a t the  exp ec ted v alue o f pos it ion, thereby ob tain ing a cla ssi ca l e qu ation of mot ion  fo r thatexpecte d  va lu e : $$ m\ \frac{d^2\langl ex \ ra ngle}{dt ^2} =-  \ fr a c{\parti al  V( \lan g l e x
\ rang l e) }{\parti al x}\ . 
\ la bel{one tw o}$$ T hi s e qua tions hows  thatthe cent er of a narrow wavep acket moves o n  a n or b it o bey ing Newton’ s la w s. M orep re cis e ly, i f wema k ea  succession of posi ti on and  mome ntum measurem ents thata r e  crude e noug h  n o t to disturb t he ap proximatio n  that al lows(1.2) to  replace( 1 .1), the  ex pec ted  va l u es  of the resul t s  wil lbe corr ela ted byNew ton ’sdet er ministiclaw.

Th is  k in dofeleme n tary der iv ati on  is  inad e quatefor t he t yp eo f c lassica l  b e h avio rth at w e h op e todisc u ssin quan tum cosmo log y  for  t he  follow ing reasons:
-    The beh av ior  of ex p e cted oraverage values is not e n ough to  de fineclas sical beh avi or. In  qu a ntum m echani cs, t he  st a t ement t ha t t he  moon move s ona cla ss ical  orbitis properly the st a tem ent that, amo nga se t of  al t er n ati ve his t o ries of its pos ition as a  f u nc tion of ti m e,th e proba bilityis hi g h for t hose hist ories exh ib itin g the  correlati ons in t ime impli e d byN ew ton’s  la w of m ot ion  andnear z e rofor a ll oth er s. Todiscu ss  classic al behavior, therefore,  we sh ouldbedealing w ith the  probabil itie s of indiv idu altimehis t ories , no t  w ith expec tedo r average va lue s . 
-   The Ehr e n f est  theo rem deriva tion  deals with the r e sults of “meas urem e n ts”  on an i so lated system w ith  a f ew degre es  of freedom . Howeve r, in qu antumcosmol ogy wea r ei nteres tedinclassical  be ha v ior inmu ch more g ener al  situa tions, over c osmological stre tches o f spa c e a nd ti me , and o v er a  wide rang e of subsys tems,[*in depen dent*]{ }of whe the rthese subs y stems are  rece iving a tt enti onfrom o bser v e rs. C erta in lywe imagin e th a tou r  ob serv ation sof t he moon’s orbit, o r a bit ofth e u n i verse’ s  e x p ansion, ha velittl e to
 classical_behavior from_the laws of quantum_mechanics are_available_in many_quantum_mechanics texts. One_popular approach is_based on Ehrenfest’s theorem_relating the acceleration_of_the expected value of position to the expected value of the force: $$m\ \frac{d^2\langle_x\rangle}{dt^2}_= -_\left\langle\frac{\partial
V}{\partial_x}\right\rangle\,
\label{oneone}$$_(written here for one-dimensional motion)._Ehrenfest’s theorem is true in_general, but_for certain states, typically narrow wave packets, we_may_approximately replace the_expected value of the force with the force evaluated_at the expected value of position,_thereby obtaining a_classical_equation_of motion for that_expected value: $$m\ \frac{d^2\langle x\rangle}{dt^2} =_- \frac{\partial V(\langle x
\rangle)}{\partial x}\.
\label{onetwo}$$ This_equation shows that the center of a_narrow wave packet moves on an_orbit obeying Newton’s laws. More_precisely, if_we make a succession of_position and momentum_measurements that_are crude enough_not to disturb the approximation that_allows (1.2) to_replace (1.1), the expected values of_the_results will be_correlated_by_Newton’s deterministic_law.

This kind of_elementary_derivation is_inadequate_for the type of classical behavior_that_we hope to discuss in quantum cosmology_for the following reasons:

-__ The behavior of_expected or average values is_not enough to define classical behavior._In quantum_mechanics, the_statement that the moon moves on a classical orbit is properly_the statement that, among a set_of alternative histories of_its position_as_a function of_time,_the probability_is high for those histories exhibiting the_correlations in_time implied by Newton’s law of_motion and near zero_for_all others. To discuss classical behavior,_therefore, we should be dealing with_the probabilities of individual time_histories,_not_with expected or average values.

-_  The Ehrenfest theorem derivation_deals with the_results of “measurements” on an isolated system_with_a few degrees of freedom. However,_in_quantum cosmology we are interested in_classical_behavior_in much more general situations,_over cosmological stretches of space and_time, and over a wide range of subsystems, [*independent*]{}_of whether these_subsystems are receiving attention from_observers._Certainly_we imagine that our observations of the moon’s orbit, or_a bit_of the universe’s_expansion, have little to