اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدTime Symmetric Quantum Theory Without Retrocausality? A Reply to Tim Maudlin
80
0
0.0
(
0
)
تأليف
Matthew S. Leifer
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
In arXiv:1707.08641, Tim Maudlin claims to construct a counterexample to the result of Proc. Roy. Soc. A vol. 473, iss. 2202, 2017 (arXiv:1607.07871), in which it was shown that no realist model satisfying a certain notion of time-symmetry (in addition to three other assumptions) can reproduce the predictions of quantum theory without retrocausality (influences travelling backwards in time). In this comment, I explain why Maudlins model is not a counterexample because it does not satisfy our time-symmetry assumption. I also explain why Maudlins claim that one of the Lemmas we used in our proof is incorrect is wrong.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
The relationship between quantum logic, standard propositional logic, and the (consistent) histories rules for quantum reasoning is discussed. It is shown that Maudlins claim [Am. J. Phys. 79 (2011) 954] that the histories approach is inconsistent, i
s incorrect. The histories approach is both internally consistent and adequate for discussing the physical situations considered by Maudlin.
The standard formulation of quantum theory assumes a predefined notion of time. This is a major obstacle in the search for a quantum theory of gravity, where the causal structure of space-time is expected to be dynamical and fundamentally probabilist
ic in character. Here, we propose a generalized formulation of quantum theory without predefined time or causal structure, building upon a recently introduced operationally time-symmetric approach to quantum theory. The key idea is a novel isomorphism between transformations and states which depends on the symmetry transformation of time reversal. This allows us to express the time-symmetric formulation in a time-neutral form with a clear physical interpretation, and ultimately drop the assumption of time. In the resultant generalized formulation, operations are associated with regions that can be connected in networks with no directionality assumed for the connections, generalizing the standard circuit framework and the process matrix framework for operations without global causal order. The possible events in a given region are described by positive semidefinite operators on a Hilbert space at the boundary, while the connections between regions are described by entangled states that encode a nontrivial symmetry and could be tested in principle. We discuss how the causal structure of space-time could be understood as emergent from properties of the operators on the boundaries of compact space-time regions. The framework is compatible with indefinite causal order, timelike loops, and other acausal structures.
A recent post by Tim Maudlin to this archive (arXiv:1408.1828) was entitled Reply to Werner. However, it was not clear to what text this was supposed to be a reply. Here I briefly provide this context, and show that Maudlins post is as ill-conceived as the original paper (arXiv:1408.1826).
Invariant Set (IS) theory is a locally causal ontic theory of physics based on the Cosmological Invariant Set postulate that the universe $U$ can be considered a deterministic dynamical system evolving precisely on a (suitably constructed) fractal dy
namically invariant set in $U$s state space. IS theory violates the Bell inequalities by violating Measurement Independence. Despite this, IS theory is not fine tuned, is not conspiratorial, does not constrain experimenter free will and does not invoke retrocausality. The reasons behind these claims are discussed in this paper. These arise from properties not found in conventional ontic models: the invariant set has zero measure in its Euclidean embedding space, has Cantor Set structure homeomorphic to the p-adic integers ($p ggg 0$) and is non-computable. In particular, it is shown that the p-adic metric encapulates the physics of the Cosmological Invariant Set postulate, and provides the technical means to demonstrate no fine tuning or conspiracy. Quantum theory can be viewed as the singular limit of IS theory when when $p$ is set equal to infinity. Since it is based around a top-down constraint from cosmology, IS theory suggests that gravitational and quantum physics will be unified by a gravitational theory of the quantum, rather than a quantum theory of gravity. Some implications arising from such a perspective are discussed.
The only evidence we have for a discrete reality comes from quantum measurements; without invoking these measurements, quantum theory describes continuous entities. This seeming contradiction can be resolved via analysis that treats measurements as b
oundary constraints. It is well-known that boundaries can induce apparently-discrete behavior in continuous systems, and strong analogies can be drawn to the case of quantum measurement. If quantum discreteness arises in this manner, this would not only indicate an analog reality, but would also offer a solution to the so-called measurement problem.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
