Abstract Unlike classical mechanics, the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics does not provide an objective space-time picture of the actual history of a physical system. This paper suggests how the conceptual foundations of quantum mechanics can be reformulated, without changing the mathematical content of the theory or its detailed agreement with experiment and without introducing any hidden variables, in order to provide an objective, covariant, Lagrangian description of reality which is deterministic and time-symmetric on the microscopic scale. The basis of this description can be expressed either as an action functional or as a summation over Feynman diagrams or paths. The probability laws associated with the quantum-mechanical measurement process, and the asymmetry in time of the principles of macroscopic causality and of the laws of statistical mechanics, are interpreted as consequences of the particular boundary conditions that apply to the actual universe. The objective interpretation does not include the observer and the measurement process among the fundamental concepts of the theory, but it does entail a revision of our ideas of determinism and of time, since in a Lagrangian theory both initial and final boundary conditions on the action functional are required.
Abstract Unlike classical mechanics, the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics does not provide an objective space-time picture of the actual history of a physical system. This paper suggests how the conceptual foundations of quantum mechanics can be reformulated, without changing the mathematical content of the theory or its detailed agreement with experiment and without introducing any hidden variables, in order to provide an objective, covariant, Lagrangian description of reality which is deterministic and time-symmetric on the microscopic scale. The basis of this description can be expressed either as an action functional or as a summation over Feynman diagrams or paths. The probability laws associated with the quantum-mechanical measurement process, and the asymmetry in time of the principles of macroscopic causality and of the laws of statistical mechanics, are interpreted as consequences of the particular boundary conditions that apply to the actual universe. The objective interpretation does not include the observer and the measurement process among the fundamental concepts of the theory, but it does entail a revision of our ideas of determinism and of time, since in a Lagrangian theory both initial and final boundary conditions on the action functional are required.
In the well known Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum mechanics, advocated by N. Bohr, the physical objects and the experimental results can be described only in a macroscopic language, leaving any possible microscopic description as unspeakable. This point of view has been deepened by C. Rovelli in the relational interpretation of Quantum mechanics. Most of the alternative interpretations, which try a detailed microscopic description of physical phenomena and of their evolution, have in common the explicit introduction of the wave function as the basic element of the theory. These interpretations require the notion of quantum state as the fundamental concept of the theory, which is the typical unspeakable physical element according to the Copenhagen interpretation. The two basic physical entities are intimately bound together by the integrity of the wave function. These interpretations are usually indicated as realistic. It is well known that the use of the wave function and its time evolution in the description of the physical processes leads unavoidably to some difficulties or so-called paradoxes. The measurement problem is at the center of these difficulties, mainly because it requires the introduction of the reduction process of the wave function, which is not included explicitly within the mathematical formalism of Quantum Mechanics. In this paper we build up and propose a model which goes beyond the standard formalism and which is able to solve the measurement problem and all the other difficulties which, in a way or in another, are related to it.
We expound an alternative to the Copenhagen interpretation of the formalism of nonrelativistic quantum mechanics. The basic difference is that the new interpretation is formulated in the language of epistemological realism. It involves a change in some basic physical concepts. The ψ function is no longer interpreted as a probability amplitude of the observed behavior of an elementary particle but as an objective physical field representing the particle itself. The particles are thus extended objects whose extension varies in time according to the variation of ψ. They are considered as fundamental regions of space with no internal structure. This implies some kind of nonlocality. Symmetrization of the configuration space wave function is interpreted as a mathematical description of a physical process, which also leads to nonlocal effects. Special consideration
In previous chapters we presented and discussed the standard, generally accepted Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics according to which there exists in nature at the most fundamental level an irreducible and ineliminable indeterminism. Although we saw that what historically constituted the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics is difficult to specify with precision, three central commitments do characterize it. (1) In general, no particle trajectories can exist in a space–time background. (2) No deterministic description of fundamental physical phenomena is possible. (3) There exists in the laws of the fundamental physical phenomena of nature an essential and ineliminable indeterminism or probability (unlike the probability of classical physics, that there reflects our ignorance of the finer details of complex physical phenomena). A flavor of these features of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics can be gotten from the quotations at the beginning of Part VIII ( Some philosophical lessons from quantum mechanics ). On this view, it is in principle impossible to predict, say, the exact future behavior of an electron (that is, to give its position and velocity as functions of the time). According to the Copenhagen school, there can be no causal description of microphenomena in terms of a continuous space–time background (as there is in classical physics). It is generally believed that a causal interpretation of quantum mechanics is impossible, although no proof of this exists.
A brief account of the world view of classical physics is given first. We then recapitulate as to why the Copenhagen interpretation of the quantum mechanics had to renounce most of the attractive features of the clasical world view such as a causal description, locality, scientific realism and introduce a fundamental distinction between system and apparatus. The crucial role is played in this by the Bohr's insistence on the wavefunction providing the most complete description possible for an even individual system. The alternative of introducing extra dynamical variables, called hidden variables, in addition to the wavefunction of the system so as to be able to retain at least some of the desirable features of classical physics, is then explored. The first such successful attempt was that of Bohm in 1952 who showed that a realistic interpretation of the quantum mechanics can be given which maintains a causal description as well as does not treat systems and measuring appeartus differently. We begin with the construction of the Bohm's theory. He introduces particle positions as the hidden variables. The particle positions play a special role in Bohm theory. The particle trajectories are guided by the wavefunction. The Bohm theory is deterministic. The probability enters through a special assumption, ``quantum equilibrium'' hypothesis, for the initial conditions on the ensemble of particle trajectories. The ``wave or particle'' dilemma is resolved by a ``wave and particle'' resolution. The measurements in Bohm theory can be described without mysticism. Bohm's theory is however nonlocal.
Ever since quantum mechanics was first developed, it has been unclear what it really tells us about reality. A novel framework, based on 5 axioms, is presented here which offers an interpretation of quantum mechanics unlike any considered thus far: It is postulated that physical objects can exist in one of two distinct modes, based on whether they have an intrinsic actual spacetime history or not. If they do, their mode of existence is actual and they can be described by classical physics. If they do not, then their mode of existence is called actualizable and they must be described in terms of an equal-weight superposition of all possible actualizable (not actual) histories. The distinction is based on an axiom according to which there exists a limit in which spacetime reduces to a one-dimension reduced version, called areatime, and that objects which merely actualizably exist in spacetime actually exist in areatime. The operational comparison of the passage of time for such objects to the passage of time for a spacetime observer is postulated to be made possible by what is called an angular dual bilateral symmetry. This symmetry can be decomposed into the superposition of two imaginary phase angles of opposite sign. To mathematically describe the spacetime manifestation of objects which actually exist in areatime, each actualizable spacetime history is associated with an actualizable path, which in turn is associated with the imaginary phases. For a single free particle, the complex exponent is identified with a term proportional to its relativistic action, thus recovering the path integral formulation of quantum mechanics. Although based on some highly unfamiliar ideas, this framework appears to render at least some of the usual mysteries connected with quantum mechanics amenable to simple conceptual understanding. It also appears to connect the foundations of quantum theory to the foundation of the special theory of relativity while clarifying its relationship to the general theory of relativity and yields a testable prediction about a type of experiment, as yet unperformed, which under the current paradigm is utterly unexpected, namely, that the gravitational field of radiation is zero. The paper concludes with some speculations about how the theory may be extended to a metatheory of nature.(Note the paper was edited on 3-October-2011 to remove one sentence on page 7)
We suggest an interpretation of quantum mechanics, inspired by the ideas of Aharonov et al. of a time-symmetric description of quantum theory. We show that a special final boundary condition for the Universe, may be consistently defined as to determine single classical-like measurement outcomes, thus solving the "measurement problem". No other deviation is made from standard quantum mechanics, and the resulting theory is deterministic (in a two-time sense) and local. Quantum mechanical probabilities are recovered in general, but are eliminated from the description of any single measurement. We call this the Two-time interpretation of quantum mechanics. We analyze ideal measurements, showing how the quantum superposition is, in effect, dynamically reduced to a single classical state via a "two-time decoherence" process. We discuss some philosophical aspects of the suggested interpretation. We also discuss weak measurements using the two-time formalism, and remark that in these measurement situations, special final boundary conditions for the Universe, might explain some unaccounted for phenomena.