Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userQuantum State Effusion
199
0
0.0
(
0
)
Authors
Howard M. Wiseman
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
I give a scientific perspective, with a personal emphasis, on the seminal 1992 paper, The quantum-state diffusion model applied to open systems, by Gisin and Percival.
rate research
Read More
Unperformed measurements have no results. Unobserved results can affect future measurements.
Two-photon states produce enough symmetry needed for Diracs construction of the two-oscillator system which produces the Lie algebra for the O(3,2) space-time symmetry. This O(3,2) group can be contracted to the inhomogeneous Lorentz group which, according to Dirac, serves as the basic space-time symmetry for quantum mechanics in the Lorentz-covariant world. Since the harmonic oscillator serves as the language of Heisenbergs uncertainty relations, it is right to say that the symmetry of the Lorentz-covariant world, with Einsteins $E = mc^2$, is derivable from Heisenbergs uncertainty relations.
What if the paradoxical nature of quantum theory could find its source in some undecidability analog to that of Godels incompleteness theorem ? This essay aims at arguing for such Godelian hunch via two case studies. Firstly, using a narrative based on the Newcomb problem, the theological motivational origin of quantum contextuality is introduced in order to show how this result might be related to a Liar-like undecidability. A topological generalization of contextuality by Abramsky et al. in which the logical structure of quantum contextuality is compared with Liar cycles is also presented. Secondly, the measurement problem is analyzed as emerging from a logical error. A personal analysis of the related Wigners friend thought experiment and and a recent paradox by Frauchiger and Renner is presented, by introducing the notion of meta-contextuality as a Liar-like feature underlying the neo-Copenhagen interpretations of quantum theory. Finally, this quantum Godelian hunch opens a discussion of the paradoxical nature of quantum physics and the emergence of time itself from self-contradiction.
Correlations related to related to quantum entanglement have convinced many physicists that there must be some at-a-distance connection between separated events, at the quantum level. In the late 1940s, however, O. Costa de Beauregard proposed that such correlations can be explained without action at a distance, so long as the influence takes a zigzag path, via the intersecting past lightcones of the events in question. Costa de Beauregards proposal is related to what has come to be called the retrocausal loophole in Bells Theorem, but -- like that loophole -- it receives little attention, and remains poorly understood. Here we propose a new way to explain and motivate the idea. We exploit some simple symmetries to show how Costa de Beauregards zigzag needs to work, to explain the correlations at the core of Bells Theorem. As a bonus, the explanation shows how entanglement might be a much simpler matter than the orthodox view assumes -- not a puzzling feature of quantum reality itself, but an entirely unpuzzling feature of our knowledge of reality, once zigzags are in play.
Relational Quantum Mechanics (RQM) is a non-standard interpretation of quantum theory based on the idea of abolishing the notion of absolute states of systems, in favor of states of systems relative to other systems. Such a move is claimed to solve the conceptual problems of standard quantum mechanics. Moreover, RQM has been argued to account for all quantum correlations without invoking non-local effects and, in spite of embracing a fully relational stance, to successfully explain how different observers exchange information. In this work, we carry out a thorough assessment of RQM and its purported achievements. We find that it fails to address the conceptual problems of standard quantum mechanics, and that it leads to serious conceptual problems of its own. We also uncover as unwarranted the claims that RQM can correctly explain information exchange among observers, and that it accommodates all quantum correlations without invoking non-local influences. We conclude that RQM is unsuccessful in its attempt to provide a satisfactory understanding of the quantum world.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
