It continues to be alleged that superluminal influences of any sort would be inconsistent with special relativity for the following three reasons: (i) they would imply the existence of a ‘distinguished’ frame; (ii) they would allow the detection of absolute motion; and (iii) they would violate the relativity of simultaneity. This paper shows that the first two objections rest upon very elementary misunderstandings of Minkowski geometry and on lingering Newtonian intuitions about instantaneity. The third objection has a basis, but rather than invalidating the notion of faster-than-light influences it points the way to more general conceptions of simultaneity that could allow for quantum nonlocality in a natural way.
It continues to be alleged that superluminal influences of any sort would be inconsistent with special relativity for the following three reasons: (i) they would imply the existence of a ‘distinguished’ frame; (ii) they would allow the detection of absolute motion; and (iii) they would violate the relativity of simultaneity. This paper shows that the first two objections rest upon very elementary misunderstandings of Minkowski geometry and on lingering Newtonian intuitions about instantaneity. The third objection has a basis, but rather than invalidating the notion of faster-than-light influences it points the way to more general conceptions of simultaneity that could allow for quantum nonlocality in a natural way.
It continues to be alleged that superluminal influences of any sort would be inconsistent with special relativity for the following three reasons: (i) they would imply the existence of a distinguished' frame; (ii) they would allow the detection of absolute motion; and (iii) they would violate the relativity of simultaneity. This paper shows that the first two objections rest upon very elementary misunderstandings of Minkowski geometry and lingering Newtonian intuitions about instantaneity. The third objection has a basis, but rather than invalidating the notion of faster than light influences it points the way to more general conceptions of simultaneity that could allow for quantum nonlocality in a natural way.
In an earlier paper the author expounded an interferometer scheme to communicate classical data over an entangled quantum channel. We return to this concept to show that the laws of Quantum Mechanics are not violated and that the device is able to affect the statistical blend of the quantum states (and that this can be detected) but not the statistics - i.e. the physics of observables. The ideas of superluminal information transfer, discussed in the previous paper, are taken forward to develop a notion of absolute space, time and motion with relativistic effects ascribed to motion through an absolute reference frame - as the logical consequences dictate, permeated with a material causing the 'relativistic' effects. The reciprocal nature of the Lorentz Transform is shown to fail under superluminal signalling - one frame will be absolutely time dilated and length contacted; thus a full 'Ether Transformation' (though this cannot be a group) and a velocity addition law are derived, the Twin's Paradox is reconsidered. It would seem, in Special Relativity at least, that the phenomenological effects of motion are placed in an absolute, logical, materialistic setting, rather than a confusing relative one that, perhaps, allows no further inspection of just 'what it is' causing the effects. The author then discusses whether this programme can be carried forward into General Relativity with the space-time distortions ascribable to changes in the properties of the ether but on the whole describable in 3-space.
Two statements in physics are frequently conflated: that nothing can travel faster than light, and that two entangled particles behave as if "instantaneously" connected regardless of their separation. This paper addresses both questions together: whether a faster-than-light particle could exist and, if so, whether it would count as matter; and whether quantum entanglement actually violates the light-speed limit. Starting from the energy–velocity relation of special relativity, it is shown that massive particles cannot reach the speed of light, and the properties of hypothetical tachyons (imaginary mass, absence of a rest frame and violation of causality) are examined. Using the singlet state, the non-separability, reduced state and correlation properties of entanglement are derived, and the quantum violation of the CHSH inequality up to 2√2 is computed. Finally, via the no-signaling theorem, it is shown that entanglement produces non-local correlations without permitting superluminal communication. In conclusion, nature accommodates non-local correlations without allowing any object to travel faster than light.
Thus far I have been primarily concerned with how an interpretation of quantum mechanics might, or might not, be local. This question is traditionally not sharply distinguished from the question of whether quantum mechanics is consistent with the theory of relativity. However, the two questions are indeed quite distinct, and should be recognized as such explicitly. The theory of relativity What does relativity require? As a first approximation, we may make the distinction by noting that the requirements of the theory of relativity are themselves unclear. Minimally, relativity seems to require that there be no way to distinguish one reference frame from another – i.e., that there be no experimental procedure that can determine which of two inertial observers is ‘really’ moving, or more generally that there be no way to discover an observer's absolute velocity. Most authors are willing to find in (special) relativity a stronger requirement: namely, Lorentz-invariance. They say that relativity requires that in fact there is no such thing as absolute velocity. This requirement goes beyond the minimum – it might be that there is an absolute rest frame (so that absolute velocities are given by motion relative to this frame) while there is no way to find it. (As I will discuss in chapter 9, exactly this situation occurs in Bohm's theory.)
Quantum mechanics implies the existence of correlations which cannot be described by any local theory. These nonlocal correlations possibly suggest the existence of particles traveling faster than light (tachyons). But the potential paradoxes associated with their existence imply that, even i f these tachyons do exist, it should not be possible to control them in a manner necessary for human superluminal (faster than light) communication. Indeed, the unitary nature of the time development operator precludes the possibility of using non-local correlations to communicate superluminally within the quantum formalism. A simplified model which preserves unitary time development i s shown to be useful in studying 'thought experiments' which appear init ially to allow for superluminal communication. The consistency of quantum mechanics is questioned when measurements of retarded fields are considered. I f certain idealized measurements are possible in principle, then the quantum formalism appears inconsistent. I f the measurements are not possible in principle, then 'state reduct ion' (non-unitary time evolution of the state operator) in a pragmatic sense can be said to have occurred. The suggestion that tachyons be used to explain the non-local correlations i s abandoned in favor of another model whose philosophy is supported by the tenets of relativity theory. Such a model may imply the existence of a more general quantum theory where a quantum system itself can be taken as a (generalized) frame of reference.
Quantum mechanics exhibits nonlocal correlations, most clearly demonstrated by entanglement and the violation of Bell inequalities. These phenomena are often described as implying “faster-than-light influences,” creating an apparent contradiction with special relativity. This paper shows that no such contradiction exists once a clear distinction is made between propagating causal influence and global constraint resolution. In a harmonic, structure-first framework, entangled systems constitute single coherent structures extended across space. Measurement imposes a local boundary condition that globally refines the allowed state of the system without transmitting energy, signals, or information. Relativistic causality remains intact because no controllable superluminal communication is possible. Quantum nonlocality reflects structural nonseparability, not superluminal dynamics.