Metafizika

ON THE PARADOXES ASSOCIATED WITH A CHANGE IN THE REFERENCE SYSTEM

Aleksandr V. Belinsky, Michael H. Shulman

Published Aug 25, 2022• 0 citations

Abstract

In 1905, Einstein’s fundamental article [1] was published, the fundamental laws of the theory of relativity were discovered, including the clock paradox. These discoveries led to revolutionary changes in physics, including astrophysics. We show the close relationship of this discipline with the so-called quantum nonlocality. It manifests itself in the highlighted role of the light cone, in the concepts of precedence and correlation between distant events, in the ideas of long-range and short-range interactions, in the paradoxes of quantum interactions at a distance, in apparent violations of causality during the birth of black holes, in the instantaneous occurrence of inertial forces arising in accordance with Mach’s principle.

DOI: 10.22363/2224-7580-2022-2-40-54

Related papers

The Bohr—Einstein confrontation: phenomena and physical reality

Sandro Petruccioli

As Quine wrote in 1961, what strikes us in a paradox is its initial air of absurdity, which develops into a sort of psychological discomfort when we compare the conclusions of the reasoning with the apparently irrefutable arguments on which it is based. However, as he went on to observe, ‘More than once in history the discovery of paradox has been the occasion for major reconstruction at the foundations of thought’. Catastrophe may therefore lurk even in the most innocent-seeming of paradoxes and force us to recognize the arbitrary nature ‘of a buried premise or of some preconception previously reckoned as central to physical theory, to mathematics or to the thinking process’. More recently, ideas of this kind have been used to assert in general that the role of paradox in the growth of knowledge is to generate category switches and to construct new universes of discourse. It could also be argued that paradoxes constitute elements of the logic of discovery capable of amplifying and thus making intelligible the still obscure phases accompanying paradigm shifts. Paradoxes would thus represent points of accumulation for the tension created between a given system of conceptual representation and a theory or empirical discovery that violates it. Historians of science have tried different interpretative approaches in their attempts to unravel the thought process that was to lead Einstein in 1905 to the formulation of special relativity and the simultaneous demolition of the classical conception of space and time.

Cambridge University Press eBooksNov 18, 19930 citations

Is Any Theory Compatible with the Quantum Predictions Necessarily Nonlocal?

Bernard d’Espagnat

Introduction Important advances in scientific knowledge may, not infrequently, be looked at from several angles. Here, in investigating the question the article title defines, part of our attention will have to be turned on the relationships of Bell's theorem to the old, but still not fully cleared up, question of the nature of causality. The word “nonlocality” means the violation of local causality, the initial meaning of whichwas that no influence, that is, no causal action , can be propagated faster than light. For a long time it was a received view that actions somewhat akin to the basically time-directed ones that living beings perform also take place within inanimate nature. This conception of causality may be called the causality–action theory . But later, having in view Hume's serious reservations concerning it, renowned philosophers of science claimed it might and should be dropped, since the effects it was meant to account for could be explained just as well by considering that what is at work is simply a conjunction of physical laws expressed by means of differential equations – a view that later Hempel and Oppenheim generalized and called the D-N (deductive–nomological) model of explanation (reprinted in [1]). Here the (widely accepted, as it seems) corresponding conception of causality will, for simplicity, be called the law-centered theory of causality . But does the latter theory subsume, at least within physics, all the meanings of the word ‘cause’ that true understanding calls for? Among philosophers the matter is not settled. Hempel himself granted that in several respects the D-N model is somehow inadequate for analyzing the cause–effect relationship [2]. And it seems indeed that a significant argument favoring a ‘no’ answer to the question might have been put forward as early as 1907 (although, to our knowledge, it was not), when Einstein pointed out that according to his then two years old special relativity (SR) theory, if we assumed an effect could follow its cause sooner than light velocity permits, then in some other frames of reference it would occur before its cause. For, concerning this consequence of the assumption, he wrote, “in my opinion, regarded as pure logic … it contains no contradiction; however it absolutely clashes with the character of our total experience, and in this way is proved the impossibility of the hypothesis” [3].

Cambridge University Press eBooksAug 31, 20161 citation

NONLOCAL CORRELATIONS AND RELATIVITY OF PHYSICAL QUANTITIES

Aleksandr V. Belinsky, I. I. Djadan

Since the paper of Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen was published where the quantum nonlocality phenomenon was first problematized many physical explanations for this have been proposed. None of them won full recognition from physicists. Perhaps it is time to consider the issue more broadly with the involvement of non-physical arguments that have an abstract mathematical, general scientific, philosophical and historical projections. This work is an attempt at such a direction.

MetafizikaJul 17, 20231 citation

EPR paradox, quantum nonlocality and physical reality

Marian Kupczyński

Eighty years ago Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen demonstrated that instantaneous reduction of wave function, believed to describe completely a pair of entangled physical systems, led to EPR paradox. The paradox disappears in statistical interpretation of quantum mechanics (QM) according to which a wave function describes only an ensemble of identically prepared physical systems. QM predicts strong correlations between outcomes of measurements performed on different members of EPR pairs in far-away locations. Searching for an intuitive explanation of these correlations John Bell analysed so called local realistic hidden variable models and proved that correlations consistent with these models satisfy Bell inequalities which are violated by some predictions of QM and by experimental data. Several different local models were constructed and inequalities proven. Some eminent physicists concluded that Nature is definitely nonlocal and that it is acting according to a law of nonlocal randomness. According to these law perfectly random, but strongly correlated events, can be produced at the same time in far away locations and a local and causal explanation of their occurrence cannot be given. We strongly disagree with this conclusion and we prove the contrary by analysing in detail some influential finite sample proofs of Bell and CHSH inequalities and so called Quantum Randi Challenges. We also show how one can win so called Bell's game without violating locality of Nature. Nonlocal randomness is inconsistent with local quantum field theory, with standard model in elementary particle physics and with causal laws and adaptive dynamics prevailing in the surrounding us world. The experimental violation of Bell-type inequalities does not prove the nonlocality of Nature but it only confirms a contextual character of quantum observables and gives a strong argument against counterfactual definiteness and against a point of view according to which experimental outcomes are produced in irreducible random way.

arXiv:1602.02959Journal of Physics Conference SeriesMar 1, 201627 citations

From "Spooky Action" to "Basal Manifestation": A Unified Explanation of Quantum Entanglement and Nonlocality Based on the ITC Theory

Lei Ding

The conflict between the nonlocality exhibited by quantum entanglement and the local causality required by the theory of relativity constitutes a core puzzle of modern physics. Based on the theory of the global Instantaneous Teleportation Cosmos (ITC), this paper proposes a fundamental solution to this conundrum. With the first principle that instantaneous (zero-latency) transmission is achievable between any two points in the universe, the ITC theory establishes absolute time and an absolute basal structure as the ultimate frame of reference for the universe. Within this framework, the three-dimensional continuous space we perceive is not a fundamental existence, but a phenomenon emerging from this non-spatial absolute basal structure. The nature of quantum entanglement is thus reinterpreted: entangled particles are not two independent entities, but two endpoints or projections of the same absolute basal structure in the emergent spacetime. A measurement is not an action at a distance, but a synchronous information readout of this basal structure. This paradigm revolutionarily resolves the logical dilemmas arising from the EPR paradox and the violation of Bell’s inequality, and provides a solid argument for the application of the ITC theory in the quantum domain. Ultimately, it unifies the black hole information paradox, cosmological puzzles and quantum nonlocality under the core insight that the cosmos is an instantaneously connected whole.

Jan 20, 20260 citations

Transcending Relativity

Antony Valentini

Abstract ‘Transcending Relativity’ explains how the possibility of instantaneous signalling requires us to revise our ideas about the relativity of time. We begin with a sketch of relativity theory in its historical context, and we explain why instantaneous signals are usually regarded as paradoxical (potentially leading to signals travelling ‘backwards in time’). We trace the paradox to certain assumptions about how distant clocks are to be synchronised using light signals. If instead clocks are synchronised using instantaneous signals, there is no paradox. We then have a preferred time and a preferred state of rest, as in Lorentz’s original (pre-Einsteinian) view of relativity physics. The chapter ends with a discussion of how this picture makes sense according to the internal logic of pilot-wave theory.

Beyond the QuantumSep 16, 20250 citations