In the context of geometric quantization, we usually look for a map from the Poisson algebra of classical observables to the algebra of quantum observables (or rather, a sub-algebra of the classical observables, depending on polarization).
We also have the following requirements for the quantization map $Q$:
- $Q$ is $\mathbb{R}$-linear;
- for $f(x) = 1$ the constant map, we get $Q(f) = (-i\hbar)\mathbb{I}$ the identity operator;
- brackets map to brackets, i.e. $\{f_1,f_2\} = f_3 \implies [Q(f_1),Q(f_2)] = (-i\hbar)Q(f_3)$; and
- for $\{f_j\}$ a complete set of classical observables, the quantized Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}$ must be irreducible under the action of $\{Q(f_j)\}$.
Coming from a math background with a weaker physics background, I'm not sure how to motivate this last point. The first three requirements are easily motivated; the map $Q$ should preserve the Lie algebra structure.
Certainly if our set of observables is complete (i.e. there are no nontrivial $g$ such that $\{f_j,g\} = 0$ for all $j$), it separates points on the symplectic manifold $M$ that we are trying to quantize. So is the condition related to our ability to recover $M$ from $\mathcal{H}$? Part of me doubts this because, from what I can tell, this was a requirement even in Dirac's early publications, which leads me to think that it has physical significance; I'm also not sure if the ability to recover geometric information from the quantized Hilbert space was a major priority in the early-to-mid 20th century.
Any responses or references are highly appreciated.