Linearity allows several versions of reality to simultaneously exist in the state vector. But it implies that there is no interaction between versions, and that there will never be perception of more than one version. It also implies, in conjunction with group representation theory, that the particle-like properties of mass, energy, momentum, spin and charge are attributes of the state vectors. These results can be used to show there is no evidence for the objective existence of particles. The properties of the wave function are sufficient to explain all the particle-like properties of matter. Representation theory is also extensively employed in the Standard Model, with gauge fields transforming as representations of the internal symmetry group. And when applied to the permutation group, it is essential for understanding symmetric and antisymmetric states. In fact all of quantum mechanics is set up exactly as if it were the representation of an underlying pre-representational theory. A linear equation structure for the underlying theory is suggested, and it is shown in outline how quantum field theory emerges as a representational form of the pre-representational theory.
Linearity allows several versions of reality to simultaneously exist in the state vector. But it implies that there is no interaction between versions, and that there will never be perception of more than one version. It also implies, in conjunction with group representation theory, that the particle-like properties of mass, energy, momentum, spin and charge are attributes of the state vectors. These results can be used to show there is no evidence for the objective existence of particles. The properties of the wave function are sufficient to explain all the particle-like properties of matter. Representation theory is also extensively employed in the Standard Model, with gauge fields transforming as representations of the internal symmetry group. And when applied to the permutation group, it is essential for understanding symmetric and antisymmetric states. In fact all of quantum mechanics is set up exactly as if it were the representation of an underlying pre-representational theory. A linear equation structure for the underlying theory is suggested, and it is shown in outline how quantum field theory emerges as a representational form of the pre-representational theory.
The current form of quantum mechanics is very successful and is almost certainly correct. It is remarkable, however, that the entire structure-from the mass, spin and charge labels on particlelike states to antisymmetry to broken internal symmetries to gauge transformations to the equations of motion-is built upon concepts from group representation theory. That is, the theory is constructed exactly as if it were a representational form of an underlying theory. Our proposed form for the underlying theory is that it is based on a linear equation, OF(V)=0. F is a function of some set of independent, currently unknown variables V, with O being a linear, partial differential operator in those variables. The operator is assumed to be invariant under a group of transformations of the Vs, homomorphic to the direct product of the inhomogeneous Lorentz group and the internal symmetry group. In such a theory, a state vector, denoted by a ket with group-theoretic labels, would represent a function of the independent variables. In addition to explaining the group representational structure of quantum mechanics, an underlying theory offers insight into gauge theory.
The three major theoretical principles of quantum mechanics relevant to its interpretation are: (T1), linearity; (T2), invariance under certain groups; and (T3) the orthogonality and isolation of the different branches of the state vector. These three imply the particle-like properties of mass, energy, momentum, spin, charge, and locality are actually properties of the state vector; and this in turn implies there is no evidence for the existence of particles. Experimentally there is no evidence for collapse (E1) and theoretically linearity prohibits collapse. One also has the experimentally verified probability law (E2), which is found to rule out the many-worlds interpretation. The failure of these three major interpretation, particles, collapse, and many-worlds, apparently implies an acceptable interpretation must be based on perception. Rather than being a separate principle, probability follows in this interpretation from a weak assumption on perception plus the combinatorics when an experiment is run many times. This suggests a relatively simple experimental test of the perception interpretation.
This article shows that one can consistently incorporate nonunitary representations of at least one group into the ``ordinary'' nonrelativistic quantum mechanics. This group turns out to be Lorentz group thus giving us an alternative approach to QFT for combining the quantum mechanics and special theory of relativity which keeps the concept of wave function (belonging to some representation of Lorentz group) through the whole theory. Scalar product has been redefined to take into the account the nonunitarity of representations of Lorentz group. Understanding parity symmetry turns out to be the key ingredient throughout the process. Instead of trying to guess an equation or a set of equations for some wave functions or fields (or equivalently trying to guess a Lagrangian for the same), one derives them based only on the superposition principle and properties of wave functions under Lorentz transformations and parity. The resulting model has striking similarities with the standard quantum field theory and yet has no negative energy states, no zitterbewegung effects, symmetric energy momentum tensor and angular momentum density tensor for \emph{all} representations of Lorentz group (unifying the theoretical description of all particles), as well as clear physical interpretation. It also offers a possible interpretation why particles and antiparticles have opposite quantum numbers.
A succinct statement and justification of all the principles necessary to understand and evaluate interpretations of quantum mechanics is given. These principles provide strong constraints on interpretations. They imply the particle-like properties of mass, energy, momentum, spin, charge, and locality are actually properties of the wave function, and this in turn implies there is no evidence for the existence of particles. In addition, there is currently no experimental evidence for collapse, and a theory of collapse encounters significant hurdles. Further, the probability law is found to rule out the many-worlds interpretation, so all three major interpretations encounter serious to fatal problems. An interpretation which conforms to all the principles is given.
There are a number of experiments and observations that appear to argue for the existence of particles, including the photoelectric and Compton effects, exposure of only one film grain by a spread-out photon wave function, and particle-like trajectories in bubble chambers. It can be shown, however, that all the particle-like phenomena can be explained by using properties of the wave functions/state vectors alone. Thus there is no evidence for particles. Wave-particle duality arises because the wave functions alone have both wave-like and particle-like properties. Further the results of the Bell-Aspect experiment and other experiments on entangled systems, which seem to imply peculiar properties for particles if they exist, are easily and naturally understood if reality consists of the state vectors alone. The linear equation-Hilbert space structure for the state vectors, by itself, can explain every mystery in quantum mechanics except the origin of the probability law.
We have seen in the previous chapter how useful wave mechanics can be in solving physical problems. But wave mechanics has several limitations. It describes physical states by means of wave functions, which are functions of the positions of the particles of the system, but why should we single out position as the fundamental physical observable? For instance, we might want to describe states in terms of probability amplitudes for particles to have certain values of the momentum or energy rather than the position. A more fundamental limitation: There are attributes of physical systems that cannot be described at all in terms of the positions and momenta of a set of particles. One of these attributes is spin , which will be the subject of Chapter 4. Another is the value of the electric or magnetic field at some point in space, treated in Chapter 11. This chapter will describe the principles of quantum mechanics in a formalism which is essentially the “transformation theory” of Dirac, mentioned briefly in Section 1.4. This formalism generalizes both the wave mechanics of Schrödinger and the matrix mechanics of Heisenberg, and is sufficiently comprehensive to apply to any sort of physical system. States The first postulate of quantum mechanics is that physical states can be represented as vectors in a sort of abstract space known as Hilbert space . Before getting into Hilbert space, I need to say a bit about vectors in general. In kindergarten we learn that vectors are quantities with both magnitude and direction. Later, when we study analytic geometry, we learn instead to describe a vector in d dimensions as a string of d numbers, the components of the vector. This latter approach lends itself well to calculation, but in some respects the kindergarten version is better, because it allows us to describe relations among vectors without specifying a coordinate system. For instance, a statement that one vector is parallel to a second vector, or perpendicular to a third, has nothing to do with how we choose our coordinate system.