One of the most puzzling facts about quantum mechanics is that although quantum theory offers a very accurate framework encompassing phenomena going from chemistry to high energy physics, it does not provide us with clear indications favoring some world view in the relativistic domain. Consequently, many physicists have held an instrumentalist point of view. Even though in non-relativistic physics already exists a realistic interpretation of quantum mechanics due to Heisenberg, who considers quantum states as states of disposition (the real tendency interpretation), the efforts for extending this interpretation to the relativistic domain were found wanting. The basic problem is the dependence of the states on the frame within which collapse takes place. We show here that a suitable use of the causal structure of the devices involved in the measurement process allows us to introduce a covariant notion for the collapse of quantum states and to preserve the tendency interpretation in relativistic quantum mechanics. However, we shall see that this extended interpretation requires the introduction of a relational concept of reality.
One of the most puzzling facts about quantum mechanics is that although quantum theory offers a very accurate framework encompassing phenomena going from chemistry to high energy physics, it does not provide us with clear indications favoring some world view in the relativistic domain. Consequently, many physicists have held an instrumentalist point of view. Even though in non-relativistic physics already exists a realistic interpretation of quantum mechanics due to Heisenberg, who considers quantum states as states of disposition (the real tendency interpretation), the efforts for extending this interpretation to the relativistic domain were found wanting. The basic problem is the dependence of the states on the frame within which collapse takes place. We show here that a suitable use of the causal structure of the devices involved in the measurement process allows us to introduce a covariant notion for the collapse of quantum states and to preserve the tendency interpretation in relativistic quantum mechanics. However, we shall see that this extended interpretation requires the introduction of a relational concept of reality.
We have recently introduced a realistic, covariant, interpretation for the reduction process in relativistic quantum mechanics. The basic problem for a covariant description is the dependence of the states on the frame within which collapse takes place. A suitable use of the causal structure of the devices involved in the measurement process allowed us to introduce a covariant notion for the collapse of quantum states. However, a fully consistent description in the relativistic domain requires the extension of the interpretation to quantum fields. The extension is far from straightforward. Besides the obvious difficulty of dealing with the infinite degrees of freedom of the field theory, one has to analyze the restrictions imposed by causality concerning the allowed operations in a measurement process. In this paper we address these issues. We shall show that, in the case of partial causally connected measurements, our description allows us to include a wider class of causal operations than the one resulting from the standard way for computing conditional probabilities. This alternative description could be experimentally tested. A verification of this proposal would give a stronger support to the realistic interpretations of the states in quantum mechanics. 1
We have recently introduced a realistic, covariant, interpretation for the reduction process in relativistic quantum mechanics. The basic problem for a covariant description is the dependence of the states on the frame within which collapse takes place. A suitable use of the causal structure of the devices involved in the measurement process allowed us to introduce a covariant notion for the collapse of quantum states. However, a fully consistent description in the relativistic domain requires the extension of the interpretation to quantum fields. The extension is far from straightforward. Besides the obvious difficulty of dealing with the infinite degrees of freedom of the field theory, one has to analyse the restrictions imposed by causality concerning the allowed operations in a measurement process. In this paper we address these issues. We shall show that, in the case of partial causally connected measurements, our description allows us to include a wider class of causal operations than the one resulting from the standard way of computing conditional probabilities. This alternative description could be experimentally tested. A verification of this proposal would give stronger support to the realistic interpretations of the states in quantum mechanics.
Given the controversial status of the various interpretations of non-relativistic quantum mechanics (QM for short), it may seem crazy to use the philosophy of quantum physics to try to learn some lessons about the prevailing problems in the literature on dispositions and causal powers. However, such an attempt seems worthwhile for at least three reasons. The first is more internal to the philosophy of QM. Apart from a seminal paper by Robert Clifton and Constantine Pagonis (1995), who investigated the issue of dispositional properties in Bohmian mechanics, very little has been done to shed This neglect seems particularly surprising, especially if one considers that some of the founding fathers of quantum physics, notably Werner Heisenberg, have made direct reference to Aristotelian potentiae to refer to and interpret the elusive nature of the atomic and subatomic world ‘in se’, that is, before measurement: ‘Such a probability function [i.e. the statistical algorithm of quantum theory] combines objective and subjective elements. It contains statements on possibilities, or better tendencies (“potentiae” in Aristotelian philosophy), and such statements are completely objective, they don’t depend on any observer the passage from the “possible” to the Some years before, Henry Margenau3 had already characterized the properties of quantum systems as merely latent, in contrast to the properties intervening in the description of classical systems, which are always definite even when they are merely dispositional. Similarly, Karl Popper4 and Nicholas Maxwell5 have defended some sort of a propensity interpretation of probability, and a view of quantum reality essentially characterized by irreducibly probabilistic propensities. Influenced by this tradition, Michael Redhead’s influential textbook on the philosophy of QM distinguishes among three different interpretations of the theory, the second of which presupposes real propensities and potentialities and attributes to measurements the function of ‘converting latent values in possessed values’.6 Clearly, for this second interpretation to make less than an instrumentalistic sense, one needs to construe potentialities and dispositions as real properties of systems. Consequently, it seems important to try to get a firmer grasp of the sense in which QM might need irreducible dispositions to shed light on the nature of the properties of quantum systems before measurements, in particular when the state of such systems is not an eigenstate of the relevant physical observable.
Non-relativistic objective collapse theories have been remarkably successful in addressing the conceptual problems of standard quantum mechanics. Despite substantial efforts, the project of extending them to the relativistic domain remains burdened by significant conceptual objections and technical challenges, often taken to cast doubt on the viability of the program as a whole. On the conceptual side, relativistic collapse theories have been claimed to face challenges involving tension between instantaneous collapse and relativity, frame-dependence of property values and probabilities, the possibility of superluminal signaling and the failure of narratability. On the technical side, persistent infinities, difficulties in constructing fully covariant frameworks and the apparent need for non-standard fields have hindered the development of workable models. In this paper, we offer a systematic rebuttal of the conceptual objections and provide a structured account of the remaining technical challenges. We conclude that relativistic collapse theories do provide a promising route toward a fully relativistic quantum framework that overcomes the conceptual limitations of standard quantum theory.
I suggest a contextual realist interpretation of Carlo Rovelli’s relational quantum mechanics. The principal point is a correct understanding of the concept of reality and taking into account the categorical distinction between the ideal and the real. Within my interpretation, consciousness of the observer does not play any metaphysical role. The proposed approach can also be understood as a return to the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, corrected within the framework of contextual realism. The contextual realism allows one to get rid of the metaphysical problems encountered by various interpretations of quantum mechanics, including the relational one. A wave function neither literally reflects an “exterior reality”, nor is it merely a predictive mathematical tool. In particular, an entangled wave function can be viewed as the formal cause of quantum correlations whose reality is contextual. The reduction of a wave function is not a real physical process. And there are no autonomous quantum events which would be different from the facts of their representation. The quantum measurement problem results from a confusion between the categories of the ideal and the real. It is dissolved logically. The quantum theory plays the role of a Wittgensteinian rule (norm), “measuring” physical reality within a language game of its application.
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.