Is There Really "Retrocausation" in Time-Symmetric Approaches to Quantum Mechanics?

Ruth E. Kastner

Published Jul 14, 2016• 7 citations

Abstract

Time-symmetric interpretations of quantum theory are often presented as featuring "retrocausal" effects in addition to the usual forward notion of causation. This paper examines the ontological implications of certain time- symmetric theories, and finds that no dynamical notion of causation applies to them, either forward or backward. It is concluded that such theories actually describe a static picture, in which the notion of causation is relegated to a descriptor of static relationships among events. In addition, these theories lead to an epistemic rather than ontologically referring, realist view of quantum states.

Related papers

Is there really “retrocausation” in time-symmetric approaches to quantum mechanics?

Ruth E. Kastner

Time-symmetric interpretations of quantum theory are often presented as featuring “retrocausal” effects in addition to the usual forward notion of causation. This paper examines the ontological implications of certain time-symmetric theories, and finds that no dynamical notion of causation applies to them, either forward or backward. It is concluded that such theories actually describe a static picture, in which the notion of causation is relegated to a descriptor of static relationships among events. In addition, these theories lead to an epistemic rather than ontologically referring, realist view of quantum states.

arXiv:1607.04196AIP conference proceedingsJan 1, 20177 citations

Is a time symmetric interpretation of quantum theory possible without retrocausality?

Matthew Leifer, Matthew F. Pusey

Huw Price has proposed an argument that suggests a time symmetric ontology for quantum theory must necessarily be retrocausal, i.e. it must involve influences that travel backwards in time. One of Price's assumptions is that the quantum state is a state of reality. However, one of the reasons for exploring retrocausality is that it offers the potential for evading the consequences of no-go theorems, including recent proofs of the reality of the quantum state. Here, we show that this assumption can be replaced by a different assumption, called λ -mediation, that plausibly holds independently of the status of the quantum state. We also reformulate the other assumptions behind the argument to place them in a more general framework and pin down the notion of time symmetry involved more precisely. We show that our assumptions imply a timelike analogue of Bell's local causality criterion and, in doing so, give a new interpretation of timelike violations of Bell inequalities. Namely, they show the impossibility of a (non-retrocausal) time symmetric ontology.

arXiv:1607.07871Proceedings of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering SciencesJun 1, 2017123 citations

Time Symmetric Quantum Theory Without Retrocausality? A Reply to Tim Maudlin

Matthew Leifer

In arXiv:1707.08641, Tim Maudlin claims to construct a counterexample to the result of Proc. Roy. Soc. A vol. 473, iss. 2202, 2017 (arXiv:1607.07871), in which it was shown that no realist model satisfying a certain notion of time-symmetry (in addition to three other assumptions) can reproduce the predictions of quantum theory without retrocausality (influences travelling backwards in time). In this comment, I explain why Maudlin's model is not a counterexample because it does not satisfy our time-symmetry assumption. I also explain why Maudlin's claim that one of the Lemmas we used in our proof is incorrect is wrong.

arXiv:1708.04364Aug 15, 20171 citation

Retrocausality & TGD

Matti Pitkänen

This article is inspired by the article "Is a time symmetric interpretation of quantum theory possible without retrocausality?" of Leifer and Pusey related to the notion of retrocausality. Retrocausality means the possibility of causal influences propagating in non-standard time direction. The conjecture is that retrocausality could allow wave functions to be real and allow to get rid of the problematic notion of state function reduction. TGD leads to a new view about reality of wave function solving the basic problem of quantum measurement theory. In ZEO quantum states are replaced by zero energy states analogous to pairs of initial and final states in ordinary positive energy ontology and can be regarded as superpositions of classical deterministic time evolutions. The sequence of state function reductions means a sequence of re-creations of the superpositions of classical realities identified as space-time surfaces. The TGD based view about scattering amplitudes has rather concrete connection with the view of Cramer as I interpret it. There is however no attempt to reduce quantum theory to a purely classical theory. The notion of the "world of classical worlds" (WCW) consisting of classical realities identified as space-time surfaces replaces space-time as a fixed observer independent reality in TGD. Retrocausality is basic aspect of TGD. Zero Energy Ontology (ZEO) predicts that both arrows of time are possible. In this sense TGD is time symmetric. On the other hand, twistor lift of TGD predicts a violation of time reflection T and this might imply that second arrow of causality dominates in some sense. The ZEO based view about state function reduction essential for TGD inspired theory of consciousness and implying generalized Zeno effect giving rise to conscious entities - "selves" - is also essential. One might say that when conscious entity dies it re-incarnates as time-reversed self.

Prespacetime journalSep 5, 20170 citations

Does Time-Symmetry Imply Retrocausality? How the Quantum World Says "Maybe"

Huw Price

It has often been suggested that retrocausality offers a solution to some of the puzzles of quantum mechanics: e.g., that it allows a Lorentz-invariant explanation of Bell correlations, and other manifestations of quantum nonlocality, without action-at-a-distance. Some writers have argued that time-symmetry counts in favour of such a view, in the sense that retrocausality would be a natural consequence of a truly time-symmetric theory of the quantum world. Critics object that there is complete time-symmetry in classical physics, and yet no apparent retrocausality. Why should the quantum world be any different? This note throws some new light on these matters. I call attention to a respect in which quantum mechanics is different, under some assumptions about quantum ontology. Under these assumptions, the combination of time-symmetry without retrocausality is unavailable in quantum mechanics, for reasons intimately connected with the differences between classical and quantum physics (especially the role of discreteness in the latter). Not all interpretations of quantum mechanics share these assumptions, however, and in those that do not, time-symmetry does not entail retrocausality.

Jan 1, 201193 citations

Causality and Non-Locality in Quantum Mechanics: An argument for retrocausation

Jørn Kløvfjell Mjelva

It has been claimed that quantum mechanics is a non-local theory, i.e., that the predictions of quantum mechanics are at odds with a conception of the world where all the interactions are mediated by local mechanisms. The cited reason is the violation of the Bell inequality in cases where measurements are performed on quantum systems of particles that have interacted in the past. Quantum mechanics predicts that the state of the particles in such a system are correlated, a result obtained from considering a thought-experiment often known as EPR. In this thesis, I will argue that the violation of the Bell inequality in EPR forces us to either accept that causes sometimes act both backwards and forwards in time, or give up some widely-held assumptions about causal relations or the role of causal explanations. First, I will present three principles regarding causality that I take be widely accepted. I will then present the background for the claim the quantum mechanics is a non-local theory, and discuss the implications of non-local causal influences in light of the Special Theory of Relativity. One argument against a causal explanation of the EPR-correlations will be discussed, and different models for the causal structure of EPR will be assessed. I will argue that a retrocausal model – models that include instances of retrocausation, where the direction of causation is the opposite of the direction of time – is the only viable option if we want to uphold the three principles presented in chapter 1. I will discuss the plausibility of rejecting one of these principles, and argue that at least one of the can be restricted in a way that still accounts for our commitment to it. Finally, I will assess the non-local models against the retrocausal models, and argue that a retrocausal model offers interpretational advantages over the non-local alternatives.

Jan 1, 20170 citations