Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userDispelling the Quantum Spooks -- a Clue that Einstein Missed?
175
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
It is well-known that Bells Theorem and other No Hidden Variable theorems have a retrocausal loophole, because they assume that the values of pre-existing hidden variables are independent of future measurement settings. (This is often referred to, misleadingly, as the assumption of free will.) However, it seems to have gone unnoticed until recently that a violation of this assumption is a straightforward consequence of time-symmetry, given an understanding of the quantization of light that would have seemed natural to Einstein after 1905. The new argument shows precisely why quantization makes a difference, and why time-symmetry alone does not imply retrocausality, in the classical context. It is true that later developments in quantum theory provide a way to avoid retrocausality, without violating time-symmetry; but this escape route relies on the ontic conception of the wave function that Einstein rejected. Had this new argument been noticed much sooner, then, it seems likely that retrocausality would have been regarded as the default option for hidden variables theories (a fact that would then have seemed confirmed by Bells Theorem and the No Hidden Variable theorems). This paper presents these ideas at a level intended to be accessible to general readers.
rate research
Read More
Quantum weirdness has been in the news recently, thanks to an ingenious new experiment by a team led by Roland Hanson, at the Delft University of Technology. Much of the coverage presents the experiment as good (even conclusive) news for spooky action-at-a-distance, and bad news for local realism. We point out that this interpretation ignores an alternative, namely that the quantum world is retrocausal. We conjecture that this loophole is missed because it is confused for superdeterminism on one side, or action-at-a-distance itself on the other. We explain why it is different from these options, and why it has clear advantages, in both cases.
The largest asteroids in the Koronis family (sizes $geq 25$ km) have very peculiar rotation state properties, with the retrograde- and prograde-rotating objects being distinctly different. A recent e-analysis of observations suggests that one of the asteroids formerly thought to be retrograde-rotating, 208~Lacrimosa, in reality exhibits prograde rotation, yet other properties of this object are discrepant with other members this group. We seek to understand whether the new spin solution of Lacrimosa invalidates the previously proposed model of the Koronis large members or simply reveals more possibilities for the long-term evolutionary paths, including some that have not yet been explored. We confirm and substantiate the previously suggested prograde rotation of Lacrimosa. Its spin vector has an ecliptic longitude and latitude of $(lambda,beta)=(15^circ pm 2^circ, 67^circpm 2^circ)$ and a sidereal rotation period $P=14.085734pm 0.000007$ hr. The thermal and occultation data allow us to calibrate a volume equivalent size of $D=44pm 2$ km of Lacrimosa. The observations also constrain the shape model relatively well. Assuming uniform density, the dynamical ellipticity is $Delta=0.35pm 0.05$. Unlike other large prograde-rotating Koronis members, Lacrimosa spin is not captured in the Slivan state. We propose that Lacrimosa differed from this group in that it had initially slightly larger obliquity and longer rotation period. With those parameters, it jumped over the Slivan state instead of being captured and slowly evolved into the present spin configuration. In the future, it is likely to be captured in the Slivan state corresponding to the proper (instead of forced) mode of the orbital plane precession in the inertial space.
Bell suggested that a new perspective on quantum mechanics was needed. We propose a solution of the measurement problem based on a reconsideration of the nature of particles. The solution is presented with an idealized model involving non-locality or non-separability, identified in 1927 by Einstein and implicit in the standard interpretation of single slit (or hole) diffraction. Considering particles as being localizable entities leads to an `induced collapse model, a parameter-free alternative to spontaneous collapse models, that affords a new perspective on, emph{inter alia}, nuclear decay.
The relationship between the Bell article in 1964 and its well known inequalities with the Einstein Podolsky Rosen article in 1935 is revisited. Einstein views on quantum mechanics as stated in many circumstances up to his death in 1955 are recalled. The role of David Bohm is shown to be essential to understand the link between Bell and Einsteins views. This link appears not to be as usually recounted.
This paper presents a minimal formulation of nonrelativistic quantum mechanics, by which is meant a formulation which describes the theory in a succinct, self-contained, clear, unambiguous and of course correct manner. The bulk of the presentation is the so-called lq microscopic theory (MIQM), applicable to any closed system $S$ of arbitrary size $N$, using concepts referring to $S$ alone, without resort to external apparatus or external agents. An example of a similar minimal microscopic theory is the standard formulation of classical mechanics, which serves as the template for a minimal quantum theory. The only substantive assumption required is the replacement of the classical Euclidean phase space by Hilbert space in the quantum case, with the attendant all-important phenomenon of quantum incompatibility. Two fundamental theorems of Hilbert space, the Kochen-Specker-Bell theorem and Gleasons theorem, then lead inevitably to the well-known Born probability rule. For both classical and quantum mechanics, questions of physical implementation and experimental verification of the predictions of the theories are the domain of the macroscopic theory, which is argued to be a special case or application of the more general microscopic theory.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
