This thesis is a study of the notion of time in modern physics, consisting of two parts. Part I takes seriously the doctrine that modern physics should be treated as the primary guide to the nature of time. To this end, it offers an analysis of the various conceptions of time that emerge in the context of various physical theories and, furthermore, an analysis of the relation between these conceptions of time and the more orthodox philosophical views on the nature of time. In Part II I explore the interpretation of nonrelativistic quantum mechanics in light of the suggestion that an overly Newtonian conception of time might be contributing to some of the difficulties that we face in interpreting the quantum mechanical formalism. In particular, I argue in favour of introducing backwards-in-time causal influences as part of an alternative conception of time that is consistent with the picture of reality that arises in the context of the quantum formalism. Moreover, I demonstrate that this conception of time can already be found in a particular formulation of classical mechanics. One might see that one of the central themes of Part II originates from a failure to heed properly the doctrine of Part I: study into the nature of time should be guided by modern physics and thus we should be careful not to insert a preconceived Newtonian conception of time unwittingly into our interpretation of the quantum mechanical formalism. Thus, whereas Part I is intended as a demonstration of methodology with respect to the study of time, Part II in a sense explores a confusion that can be seen as arising in the absence of this methodology.
This thesis is a study of the notion of time in modern physics, consisting of two parts. Part I takes seriously the doctrine that modern physics should be treated as the primary guide to the nature of time. To this end, it offers an analysis of the various conceptions of time that emerge in the context of various physical theories and, furthermore, an analysis of the relation between these conceptions of time and the more orthodox philosophical views on the nature of time. In Part II I explore the interpretation of nonrelativistic quantum mechanics in light of the suggestion that an overly Newtonian conception of time might be contributing to some of the difficulties that we face in interpreting the quantum mechanical formalism. In particular, I argue in favour of introducing backwards-in-time causal influences as part of an alternative conception of time that is consistent with the picture of reality that arises in the context of the quantum formalism. Moreover, I demonstrate that this conception of time can already be found in a particular formulation of classical mechanics. One might see that one of the central themes of Part II originates from a failure to heed properly the doctrine of Part I: study into the nature of time should be guided by modern physics and thus we should be careful not to insert a preconceived Newtonian conception of time unwittingly into our interpretation of the quantum mechanical formalism. Thus, whereas Part I is intended as a demonstration of methodology with respect to the study of time, Part II in a sense explores a confusion that can be seen as arising in the absence of this methodology.
Background. The author tries to identify the connection between the phenomena of quantum physics and the philosophical concepts of "fate", "free will" and "time". By examining how the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics challenges classical deterministic views, and bridging the gap between modern physics and age-old philosophical debates, the author seeks to offer a nuanced understanding of these fundamental concepts Methods. The investigation employs a multidisciplinary approach, incorporating scientific theories and discoveries alongside religious and philosophical perspectives. Various viewpoints and schools of thought are considered, spanning both Western scientific frameworks and Eastern philosophical traditions, to provide a comprehensive analysis of the topic. Results. The positions of total determinism and indeterminism are compared, highlighting their respective strengths and limitations. It delves into the parallels between Buddhist philosophy and contemporary quantum theory, suggesting that both share common ground in their understanding of reality. Additionally, the concept of creationism is examined within the context of quantum mechanics. Conclusions. The exploration reveals that the concepts of fate and free will, and their relationship with time, are deeply intertwined with the existence of a hidden quantum reality. This hidden reality, characterized by the inherent uncertainties and probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics, challenges the deterministic worldview upheld by classical physics. The investigation highlights that the interconnectedness of fate and free will with our understanding of time is profoundly influenced by the quantum realm, which introduces complexities such as the "measurement problem." As a result, the deterministic predictability of classical physics is replaced by a framework where probabilities and potentialities govern the behavior of particles. The study concludes that acknowledging the existence of this hidden quantum reality necessitates a re-evaluation of traditional notions of fate, free will, and time, suggesting that these concepts are more fluid and interconnected than previously thought. By bridging the gap between quantum theory and philosophical inquiry, the exploration offers new insights into the nature of reality and human agency, ultimately contributing to a more nuanced understanding of the universe and our place within it.
The notions of time in the theories of Newton and Einstein are reviewed so that certain of their assumptions are clarified. These assumptions will be seen as the causes of the incompatibility between the two different ways of understanding time, and seen to be philosophical hypotheses, rather than purely scientific ones. The conflict between quantum mechanics and (general) relativity is shown to be a consequence of retaining the Newtonian conception of time in the context of quantum mechanics. As a remedy for this conflict, an alternative definition of time -- earlier presented in Kitada 1994a and 1994b -- is reviewed with less mathematics and more emphasis on its philosophical aspects. Based on this revised understanding of time it is shown that quantum mechanics and general relativity are reconciled while preserving the current mathematical formulations of both theories.
A fundamental problem in understanding the nature of time is to explain its 'directionality'. The commonplace view is that this directionality is provided by the 'flow of time'. Unfortunately this concept of 'time flow', which seems to make perfect sense to us in our everyday lives, has resisted philosophical and scientific analysis so well that today it is widely regarded as having no place in the scientific account of the world. Instead, various alternative physical concepts of the directionality of time have been developed, principally the notions of the time reversibility of physical laws or theories, and of the time asymmetry of physical processes. It is frequently argued by philosophers of physics that the scientific account of the directionality of time must be framed entirely in terms of these physical notions. The thesis of the present work is that this conclusion has been reached far too hastily. It is argued that the concept of time flow is a legitimate physical concept, and furthermore, that time flow plays a real part in quantum theory. A number of conceptual investigations are necessary to support this argument. Firstly, it is necessary to give an analysis of what a physical theory of time flow might be like, and how it might be empirically established. This is given in Chapter One, which at the same time is an overview of the results of later chapters. It is found in Chapter One that the concept of physical time flow has an important connection with the concept of time reversibility, which makes it necessary to give an analysis of this notion. A detailed discussion of reversibility and time symmetry is given in Chapters Two to Five. Here it is demonstrated that the orthodox analysis of the reversibility of probabilistic theories is flawed. This conclusion allows it to be shown, in Chapter Six, that, contrary to current scientific belief, quantum theory is profoundly irreversible. This result, together with the argument of Chapter One, allows a strong prima facie case for an interpretation of quantum probabilities as involving time flow to be given. However, because of the traditional problems with the notion of time flow, for this interpretation to become respectable it needs to be demonstrated that it is possible to construct a formal model of a physical ontology in which time flow can be represented. This is undertaken in Chapter Seven. In Chapter Eight, various points about the role of probabilities in quantum theory are discussed. Finally, in Chapter Nine, the implications of relativity theory for the proposed theory of time flow are considered. It is found that relativity theory poses a serious problem for a physical theory of time flow, but the implications of relativity theory for the proposed interpretation of quantum probabilities is not clear because of deeper foundational problems with quantum theory.
For a century, quantum theory has posed a fundamental challenge to philosophical thinking. On its face, it repudiates many of the key features of the mechanical conception of physical reality. However, the challenge of developing a precise, coherent alternative to that conception has yet to be met. Here, I argue that a major hindrance to the project of quantum interpretation is its existing interpretative methodologies, which suffer from a lack of systematicity in their judgements about what aspects of the theory are interpretational relevant. In particular, I argue that current interpretations tend to marginalize the informal part of the theory in favour of its formal part, and place inappropriate emphasis on the natural language component of the formalism over its detailed mathematical structure. To counterbalance these biases, I propose that an interpretation-free zone be constructed around the theory, wherein an interpreter initially adopt a descriptive stance which considers all parts of the theory, and that the results of this deliberation~(and the judgements about what facts are interpretationally relevant) are reported as part of their interpretation.
I argue that the interpretation of quantum theory poses special challenges and difficulties which necessitate this interpretation-free zone, and that existing interpretative methodologies are insufficient to address them. Further, I argue that a reconstructive interpretative methodology, which harnesses the recent results of the quantum reconstruction program, provides a powerful means to identify almost all facts that could be interpretationally relevant, and naturally meets these challenges and difficulties. Moreover, I argue that the quantum reconstruction program offers a powerful way to discover new physical principles, and offers a systematic pathway to build a rich, coherent conception of quantum reality.
The purpose of my Thesis is to gain a better understanding of the nature of time and the problems associated with time. For example, I aim to explore the problem associated with the energy-time uncertainty relation due to the lack of a universal operator for time. Using Jan Hilgevoord's work, I will explore the idea that if a measure of time is to be obtained in quantum mechanics, then time has to be a property of physical systems that can only be measured in relation to other systems. As such, time cannot be independent of physical systems. This implies that there cannot be time without physical systems. As a result, I will show how the philosophical position of "Relationism with Respect to Time" provides an accurate account of the nature of time that is consistent with observations made in physics. In order to achieve this, I will: 1) present Hilgevoord's argument about the problems of time in quantum mechanics; 2) provide an account of the ontology of time based on Hilgevoord's work; and 3) provide an analysis of the implications of what I am proposing in connection to Einstein's theory of special and general relativity in hopes of showing that his insights can and should be applied to quantum mechanics.
Introduction Chapter 1 dealt with one of the deepest mysteries in modern science: how to explain consciousness. This Part deals with another mystery: how to make sense of quantum mechanics. Both involve a problem of reconciliation with the classical worldview, which is one hint that the two mysteries might be related. A second is that, unlike classical physics, which makes no reference to or allowance for consciousness, quantum theory raises the issue of consciousness and its relationship to the physical world in a very direct way. These hints do not necessarily mean there is a connection between the two mysteries, but by the end of this Part I hope to have shown why it would be natural to look for one. My more immediate aim here is to give the social scientific reader an introductory understanding of the experimental findings of quantum theory, its key concepts, and the debates about its interpretation. The discussion assumes no prior knowledge of quantum physics and makes no use of mathematics. Quantum theory without equations might seem like an oxymoron, and certainly reading this Part will not enable anyone to use quantum theory. But to a perhaps surprising degree it is possible to understand quantum theory without being able to use it. Its findings can be communicated in ordinary language, and the same goes for its main concepts and interpretive debates. One consequence of this has been the emergence of a virtual cottage industry of books on quantum theory for a lay audience. Most are written by physicists, and many are quite good. However, it is not just popular treatments that do without equations: much of the professional philosophical literature does as well. (I draw on both kinds of literature below.) Philosophers of physics are trained to understand the math, of course, which is necessary for a full appreciation of the issues.