We investigate temporal and causal threads in the fabric of contemporary physical theories with an emphasis on empirical and operationalistic aspects. Building on the axiomatization of general relativity proposed by J. Ehlers, F. Pirani and A. Schild and the global space-time structure elaborated by R. Penrose, S.W. Hawking, B. Carter and others, we argue that the current way of doing relativistic physics presupposes treating time and causality as primitive concepts, neither of them being `more primitive' than the other. The decision regarding which concepts to assume as primitive and which statements to regard as axioms depends on the choice of the angle at which we contemplate the whole. This standard approach is based on the presupposition that the concept of a point-like particle is a viable approximation. However, this assumption is not supported by a realistic approach to doing physics and, in particular, by quantum theory. We remove this assumption by analysing the recent works by M. Eckstein and T. Miller. They consider the space $P(M)$ of probability measures on space-time $M$ such that, for an element $μ\in P(M)$, the number $μ(K)$ specifies the probability of the occurrence of some event associated with the space-time region $K$ and the measure $μ$. In this way, $M$ is not to be regarded as a collection of space-time events, but rather as a support for corresponding probability measures. As shown by Eckstein and Miller, the space $P(M)$ inherits the causal order from the underlying space-time and facilitates a rigorous notion of a `causal evolution of probability measures'. We look at the deductive chains creating temporal and causal structures analysed in these works, in order to highlight their operational (or quasi-operational) aspect. This is impossible without taking into account the relative frequencies and correlations observed in relevant experiments.
We investigate temporal and causal threads in the fabric of contemporary physical theories with an emphasis on empirical and operationalistic aspects. Building on the axiomatization of general relativity proposed by J. Ehlers, F. Pirani and A. Schild and the global space-time structure elaborated by R. Penrose, S.W. Hawking, B. Carter and others, we argue that the current way of doing relativistic physics presupposes treating time and causality as primitive concepts, neither of them being more primitive' than the other. The decision regarding which concepts to assume as primitive and which statements to regard as axioms depends on the choice of the angle at which we contemplate the whole. This standard approach is based on the presupposition that the concept of a point-like particle is a viable approximation. However, this assumption is not supported by a realistic approach to doing physics and, in particular, by quantum theory. We remove this assumption by analysing the recent works by M. Eckstein and T. Miller. They consider the space $P(M)$ of probability measures on space-time $M$ such that, for an element $μ\in P(M)$, the number $μ(K)$ specifies the probability of the occurrence of some event associated with the space-time region $K$ and the measure $μ$. In this way, $M$ is not to be regarded as a collection of space-time events, but rather as a support for corresponding probability measures. As shown by Eckstein and Miller, the space $P(M)$ inherits the causal order from the underlying space-time and facilitates a rigorous notion of a causal evolution of probability measures'. We look at the deductive chains creating temporal and causal structures analysed in these works, in order to highlight their operational (or quasi-operational) aspect. This is impossible without taking into account the relative frequencies and correlations observed in relevant experiments.
In non relativistic physics it is assumed that both chronological ordering and causal ordering of events (telling whether there exists a causal relationship between two events or not) are absolute, observer independent properties. In relativistic physics on the other hand chronological ordering depends on the observer who assigns space-time coordinates to physical events and only causal ordering is regarded as an observer independent property. In this paper it is shown that quantum theory can be considered as a physical theory in which causal (as well as chronological) ordering of probabilistic events happening in experiments may be regarded as an observer dependent property.
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.
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.
The idea that events are equipped with a partial causal order is central to our understanding of physics in the tested regimes: given two pointlike events A and B , either A is in the causal past of B , B is in the causal past of A , or A and B are space-like separated. Operationally, the meaning of these order relations corresponds to constraints on the possible correlations between experiments performed in the vicinities of the respective events: if A is in the causal past of B , an experimenter at A could signal to an experimenter at B but not the other way around, while if A and B are space-like separated, no signaling is possible in either direction. In the context of a concrete physical theory, the correlations compatible with a given causal configuration may obey further constraints. For instance, space-like correlations in quantum mechanics arise from local measurements on joint quantum states, while time-like correlations are established via quantum channels. Similarly to other variables, however, the causal order of a set of events could be random, and little is understood about the constraints that causality implies in this case. A main difficulty concerns the fact that the order of events can now generally depend on the operations performed at the locations of these events, since, for instance, an operation at A could influence the order in which B and C occur in A ’s future. So far, no formal theory of causality compatible with such dynamical causal order has been developed. Apart from being of fundamental interest in the context of inferring causal relations, such a theory is imperative for understanding recent suggestions that the causal order of events in quantum mechanics can be indefinite. Here, we develop such a theory in the general multipartite case. Starting from a background-independent definition of causality, we derive an iteratively formulated canonical decomposition of multipartite causal correlations. For a fixed number of settings and outcomes for each party, these correlations form a polytope whose facets define causal inequalities. The case of quantum correlations in this paradigm is captured by the process matrix formalism. We investigate the link between causality and the closely related notion of causal separability of quantum processes, which we here define rigorously in analogy with the link between Bell locality and separability of quantum states. We show that causality and causal separability are not equivalent in general by giving an example of a physically admissible tripartite quantum process that is causal but not causally separable. We also show that there are causally separable quantum processes that become non-causal if extended by supplying the parties with entangled ancillas. This motivates the concepts of extensibly causal and extensibly causally separable (ECS) processes, for which the respective property remains invariant under extension. We characterize the class of ECS quantum processes in the tripartite case via simple conditions on the form of the process matrix. We show that the processes realizable by classically controlled quantum circuits are ECS and conjecture that the reverse also holds.
The idea that events obey a definite causal order is deeply rooted in our understanding of the world and at the basis of the very notion of time. But where does causal order come from, and is it a necessary property of nature? Here, we address these questions from the standpoint of quantum mechanics in a new framework for multipartite correlations that does not assume a pre-defined global causal structure but only the validity of quantum mechanics locally. All known situations that respect causal order, including space-like and time-like separated experiments, are captured by this framework in a unified way. Surprisingly, we find correlations that cannot be understood in terms of definite causal order. These correlations violate a 'causal inequality' that is satisfied by all space-like and time-like correlations. We further show that in a classical limit causal order always arises, which suggests that space-time may emerge from a more fundamental structure in a quantum-to-classical transition. Causal order is a concept that is engrained in the standard understanding of time, both in classical and quantum mechanics. Oreshkovet al.generalize the standard formalism of quantum theory to a framework with no pre-existing causal order, and find a new class of correlations that have no analogue in the classical world.
The axiomatic formulation of an Algebraic Relativistic Quantum Field Theory leads naturally -via the Haag-Kastler axioms- to the fact that operators representing observables generate a von Neumann algebra localized in a space-time region in which said observations are made. I present and explain the axioms, as well as the mathematical preliminaries needed to understand them and apply them to the so-called causal diamond and Fermi's Two-Atom System. The latter shows the importance of formulating axioms concerning causality that try to make compatible the requirement from Special Relativity according to which no causal influence can travel faster than the speed of light and the quantum mechanical theory of measurement and preparability of states. For a relativistic field-theoretic setting, these concepts must be re-formulated, and this reasoning suggests that the operator algebra must be a type III von Neumann factor. I also introduce some philosophical problems concerning our usual notion of causality from Hume to contemporary theories of counterfactual causation and show how the algebraic structure of the theory is deeply related to the causal one and how this theory can be extended if we change the way we think about causality, measurements, and local preparability of states.