Causal quantum theory assumes that measurements or collapses are well-defined physical processes, localized in space-time, and never give perfectly reliable outcomes and that the outcome of one measurement only influences the outcomes of others within its future light cone. Although the theory has unusual properties, it is not immediately evident that it is inconsistent with experiment to date. I discuss its implications and experimental tests.
Causal quantum theory assumes that measurements or collapses are well-defined physical processes, localized in space-time, and never give perfectly reliable outcomes and that the outcome of one measurement only influences the outcomes of others within its future light cone. Although the theory has unusual properties, it is not immediately evident that it is inconsistent with experiment to date. I discuss its implications and experimental tests.
Causal quantum theory is an umbrella term for ordinary quantum theory modified by two hypotheses: state vector reduction is a well-defined process, and strict local causality applies. The first of these holds in some versions of Copenhagen quantum theory and need not necessarily imply practically testable deviations from ordinary quantum theory. The second implies that measurement events which are spacelike separated have no nonlocal correlations. To test this prediction, which sharply differs from standard quantum theory, requires a precise definition of state vector reduction. Formally speaking, any precise version of causal quantum theory defines a local hidden variable theory. However, causal quantum theory is most naturally seen as a variant of standard quantum theory. For that reason it seems a more serious rival to standard quantum theory than local hidden variable models relying on the locality or detector efficiency loopholes. Some plausible versions of causal quantum theory are not refuted by any Bell experiments to date, nor is it evident that they are inconsistent with other experiments. They evade refutation via a neglected loophole in Bell experiments---the collapse locality loophole---which exists because of the possible time lag between a particle entering a measurement device and a collapse taking place. Fairly definitive tests of causal versus standard quantum theory could be made by observing entangled particles separated by $\ensuremath{\approx}0.1$ light seconds.
Quantum theory is a mathematical formalism to compute probabilities for outcomes happenning in physical experiments. These outcomes constitute events happening in space-time. One of these events represents the fact that a system located in the region of space where is situated a physical device has a certain value of a physical observable at the time when the device fires the outcome corresponding to that value of the observable. The causal structure of these events is customarily assumed fixed in an absolute way. In this paper we show that this assumption cannot be substantiated on operational grounds proving that two observers looking at the same quantum experiment can calculate the probabilities of the experiment assuming a different causal structure for the space-time events constituted by the outcomes. We will thus say that in quantum theory we have relativity of causal structure.
Explaining observations in terms of cause-and-effect (causal) relations is central to empirical science. However, in his seminal 1964 work [1], John Bell showed that the correlations between entangled quantum systems cannot be explained in terms of, possibly hidden, cause and effect relations. After four decades of experimental effort, Bell's prediction has recently been confirmed in an unambiguous way by a series of loophole-free Bell-test experiments [2-4]. These experiments, however, cannot reveal where exactly quantum mechanics breaks with our classical notion of cause and effect. Specifically, Bell's theorem is based on the central assumptions of realism and local causality. Realism posits that physical systems have real, objective properties, independent of whether we observe them or not, and local causality assumes that causal influences cannot propagate faster than the speed of light.
Quantum erasure experiments push the boundary between the quantum and classical worlds by letting delayed events influence the state of previously recorded and potentially widely distributed classical information. The only significant restriction to such unsettling violations of forward-only causality is that the distribution of forward-dependent information cannot cross out of the light cone boundaries of the event in the past, a feature that ensures no violations of causality — no rewriting of anyone else's recorded histories — can occur. The erasure interpretation of this conundrum requires rewriting of information recorded and distributed in the past, which would itself be a violation of causality. The quantum predestination interpretation removes the causal rewriting issue. However, quantum predestination requires detailed coordination of inputs from outside of the forward-dependent event's light cone, thus massively violating the same limit that prevents causality violations in such events. Yet another approach is to invoke the Schrödinger's cat variant of quantum erasure in which arbitrarily complex classical events within the light cone become quantum dependent upon the future event. As with all Schrödinger's cat interpretations of quantum mechanics, this variant of quantum erasure violates causality by discarding local classical histories such as the information-rich state of the cat's body. The most straightforward interpretation of erasure experiments is to follow the lead of the equations themselves, which transform on paper as if their components are independent of ordinary space and time limits, up to the limits imposed on them by the speed of light. Interpreting the light cone of each quantum system as an atemporal, aspatial unit in which classical time and space have no meaning results in a multi-scale, matter-dependent definition of spacetime in which every light cone is a singular quantum entity. In such a universe, both time and space are defined not as pre-existing, mass-independent continuums but as the consensus of vast numbers of constantly interacting and mutually limiting quantum-entity light cones.
Abstract Quantum mechanics and relativity are two of the most successful theoretical frameworks in modern physics, yet their conceptual foundations remain difficult to reconcile at the deepest level. Quantum theory describes physical systems through states, observables, probabilities, measurement contexts, superposition, entanglement, and nonclassical correlations. Relativity describes physical processes through space-time structure, causal order, invariant physical law, observer-dependent decomposition of time and space, and constraints on signal propagation. This article examines the conceptual relationship between quantum measurement, relativistic causality, and space-time description. The purpose is not to present a mathematical unification but to analyze how the two frameworks organize physical explanation differently and where their interpretive tensions arise. Special attention is given to the measurement problem, the status of quantum states, the role of observers and reference frames, the meaning of locality, the distinction between correlation and causal influence, and the challenge of describing quantum processes without privileging a single global time. The article argues that many apparent conflicts between quantum theory and relativity result from importing classical intuitions into domains where they no longer apply. Quantum entanglement does not permit controllable faster-than-light communication, yet it challenges classical separability. Relativity forbids superluminal signaling, yet it does not require that all physically meaningful correlations be reducible to local classical properties. Measurement introduces another difficulty because standard quantum theory often describes state update in a way that appears instantaneous, while relativistic space-time does not provide a universal present. The discussion develops a conceptual framework in which quantum measurement is treated as a physical interaction, relativistic causality as a constraint on operational influence, and space-time description as an organizing structure for events rather than a simple background stage. This analysis is relevant for quantum field theory, quantum information, relativistic quantum foundations, and future approaches to quantum gravity.