Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Foundations of Physics

Spontaneous Collapse Theories and Temporal Primitivism about Time’s Direction

Cristian López

Published Oct 1, 2022• 2 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Two views on the direction of time can be distinguished-primitivism and non-primitivism. According to the former, time's direction is an in-built, fundamental property of the physical world. According to the latter, time's direction is a derivative property of a fundamentally directionless reality. In the literature, non-primitivism has been widely supported since most (if not all) our fundamental dynamical laws are time-reversal invariant. In this paper, I offer a way out to the primitivist. I argue that we do have good grounds to support a primitive direction of time in the quantum realm. The rationale depends on exploiting the metaphysical and dynamical underdetermination of quantum theories to make a case in favor of primitivism. In particular, primitivism can be grounded in spontaneous collapse theories (e.g., GRW and CSL). The specific sense in which these theories capture a primitive direction of time is that, when the ontology of the theory is seriously taken into account, it does not remain invariant under time reversal. In taking GRW with a matter-density field (GRWm), I will argue that primitivism about the direction of time can be defended in the quantum case.

DOI
10.1007/s10701-022-00632-3

Related papers

Primitive ontology and quantum state in the GRW matter density theory

Matthias Egg, Michaël Esfeld

The paper explains in what sense the GRW matter density theory (GRWm) is a primitive ontology theory of quantum mechanics and why, thus conceived, the standard objections against the GRW formalism do not apply to GRWm. We consider the different options for conceiving the quantum state in GRWm and argue that dispositionalism is the most attractive one.

arXiv:1410.8652•Oct 31, 2014•1 citation

The direction of time in Bohmian mechanics

Cristian López, Michaël Esfeld

Abstract In this paper, we investigate the treatment of the direction of time in Bohmian mechanics. We show how Bohmian mechanics can account for the direction of time in different ways. In particular, we argue that Bohmian mechanics can be employed to accommodate reductionism, because there always is an asymmetry in the initial conditions when forward and backward evolutions of the configuration of matter are compared. It can also be employed to accommodate primitivism and relationalism due to the fact that Bohmian mechanics is a first order theory that recognizes only position as a primitive physical magnitude. We show how this fact can be employed to support a primitive direction of time by assuming Leibnizian relationalism, which reduces the direction of time to change in the configuration of matter with that change being directed as a primitive matter of fact.

•Apr 1, 2025•0 citations

Time, symmetry and structure: a study in the foundations of quantum theory

Bryan Wilson Roberts

This dissertation is about the sense in which the laws of quantum theory distinguish between the past and the future. I begin with an account of what it means for quantum theory to make such a distinction, by providing a novel derivation of the meaning of "time reversal." I then show that if Galilei invariant quantum theory does distinguish a preferred direction in time, then this has consequences for the ontology of the theory. In particular, it requires matter to admit "internal" degrees of freedom, in that the position observable generates a maximal abelian algebra. I proceed to show that this is not a purely quantum phenomenon, but can be expressed in classical mechanics as well. I then illustrate three routes for generating quantum systems that distinguish a preferred temporal direction in this way.

•Oct 2, 2012•9 citations

Seeking for a Fundamental Quantum Arrow of Time: Time Reversal and the Symmetry-To-Reality Inference in Standard Quantum Mechanics

Cristian López

In this paper I shall shed some doubts on a widely-held claim: standard quantum mechanics is time-reversal invariant, and thereby, blind to the direction of time. Building bridges between physics and philosophy, I shall argue that such a claim features some puzzling assumptions that are frequently overlooked in the literature. In particular, I shall first argue that the claim involves some methodological and metaphysical commitments that should be evaluated more prudently from philosophy and from physics. Second, I shall point out that the common inference that goes from symmetry to metaphysical conclusions needs some correction and refinement to be acceptable for time symmetry and the debate around the arrow of time

Frontiers in Physics•Sep 19, 2018•4 citations

Time-Reversal Invariance and Ontology

Ward Struyve

Albert and Callender have challenged the received view that theories like classical electrodynamics and non-relativistic quantum mechanics are time reversal invariant. They claim that time reversal should correspond to the mere reversal of the temporal order of the instantaneous states, without any accompanying change of the instantaneous state as in the standard view. As such, Albert and Callender claim, these theories are not time reversal invariant. The view of Albert and Callender has been much criticized, with many philosophers arguing that time reversal may correspond to more than the reversal of the temporal order. In this paper, we will not so much engage with that aspect of the debate, but rather deflate the disagreement by exploiting the ontological underdetermination. Namely, it will be argued that with a suitable choice of ontology, these theories are in fact time reversal invariant in the sense of Albert and Callender, in agreement with the standard view.

arXiv:2307.07856•The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science•Jun 2, 2022•8 citations

Collapse of the Wave Function: Irreversibility as a Fundamental Dynamical Principle

Abderrahim Lyoubi-Idrissi

The collapse of the wave function remains one of the deepest puzzles in quantum mechanics. The Schrödinger equation is unitary and time-reversal symmetric, yet measurement requires an additional postulate that is neither—and we have no physical explanation for why. Existing interpretations either deny that collapse is real (Many-Worlds), treat it as purely subjective (QBism), or add stochastic noise by hand without deriving it from fundamental principles (GRW, CSL). We demonstrate that collapse is a real physical process requiring fundamentally irreversible dynamics. No purely unitary, time-symmetric theory can account for the objective suppression of macroscopic superpositions—irreversibility must be built into the dynamics from the start. We introduce a minimal extension of quantum mechanics through coupling to a universal scalar field (the I-field) governed by an explicit time-asymmetric field equation. Collapse emerges objectively through deterministic dissipative dynamics, with no reference to observers, measurement devices, or stochastic noise. By integrating out the I-field degrees of freedom, we derive effective Lindblad dynamics for quantum systems. The collapse rate scales quadratically with system mass, ensuring microscopic quantum coherence remains intact while macroscopic superpositions are dynamically suppressed. Unlike stochastic collapse models (GRW/CSL), the mechanism is deterministic and produces no spontaneous heating. Unlike gravitational collapse proposals (Diósi-Penrose), it provides explicit field equations rather than heuristic arguments. Unlike environmental decoherence, the irreversibility is fundamental rather than effective. The theory respects relativistic causality and makes testable predictions for current and near-future experiments in matter-wave interferometry, optomechanical systems, and molecular interferometry. Observation of mass-dependent decoherence without accompanying stochastic heating would provide strong evidence for the I-field mechanism. The framework establishes irreversibility as a fundamental interaction rather than an emergent phenomenon, providing a unified physical origin for both wave function collapse and the quantum arrow of time.

•Jan 16, 2026•0 citations
Two views on the direction of time can be distinguished-primitivism and non-primitivism. According to the former, time's direction is an in-built, fundamental property of the physical world. According to the latter, time's direction is a derivative property of a fundamentally directionless reality. In the literature, non-primitivism has been widely supported since most (if not all) our fundamental dynamical laws are time-reversal invariant. In this paper, I offer a way out to the primitivist. I argue that we do have good grounds to support a primitive direction of time in the quantum realm. The rationale depends on exploiting the metaphysical and dynamical underdetermination of quantum theories to make a case in favor of primitivism. In particular, primitivism can be grounded in spontaneous collapse theories (e.g., GRW and CSL). The specific sense in which these theories capture a primitive direction of time is that, when the ontology of the theory is seriously taken into account, it does not remain invariant under time reversal. In taking GRW with a matter-density field (GRWm), I will argue that primitivism about the direction of time can be defended in the quantum case.
Abstract In this paper, we investigate the treatment of the direction of time in Bohmian mechanics. We show how Bohmian mechanics can account for the direction of time in different ways. In particular, we argue that Bohmian mechanics can be employed to accommodate reductionism, because there always is an asymmetry in the initial conditions when forward and backward evolutions of the configuration of matter are compared. It can also be employed to accommodate primitivism and relationalism due to the fact that Bohmian mechanics is a first order theory that recognizes only position as a primitive physical magnitude. We show how this fact can be employed to support a primitive direction of time by assuming Leibnizian relationalism, which reduces the direction of time to change in the configuration of matter with that change being directed as a primitive matter of fact.
This dissertation is about the sense in which the laws of quantum theory distinguish between the past and the future. I begin with an account of what it means for quantum theory to make such a distinction, by providing a novel derivation of the meaning of "time reversal." I then show that if Galilei invariant quantum theory does distinguish a preferred direction in time, then this has consequences for the ontology of the theory. In particular, it requires matter to admit "internal" degrees of freedom, in that the position observable generates a maximal abelian algebra. I proceed to show that this is not a purely quantum phenomenon, but can be expressed in classical mechanics as well. I then illustrate three routes for generating quantum systems that distinguish a preferred temporal direction in this way.
In this paper I shall shed some doubts on a widely-held claim: standard quantum mechanics is time-reversal invariant, and thereby, blind to the direction of time. Building bridges between physics and philosophy, I shall argue that such a claim features some puzzling assumptions that are frequently overlooked in the literature. In particular, I shall first argue that the claim involves some methodological and metaphysical commitments that should be evaluated more prudently from philosophy and from physics. Second, I shall point out that the common inference that goes from symmetry to metaphysical conclusions needs some correction and refinement to be acceptable for time symmetry and the debate around the arrow of time
Albert and Callender have challenged the received view that theories like classical electrodynamics and non-relativistic quantum mechanics are time reversal invariant. They claim that time reversal should correspond to the mere reversal of the temporal order of the instantaneous states, without any accompanying change of the instantaneous state as in the standard view. As such, Albert and Callender claim, these theories are not time reversal invariant. The view of Albert and Callender has been much criticized, with many philosophers arguing that time reversal may correspond to more than the reversal of the temporal order. In this paper, we will not so much engage with that aspect of the debate, but rather deflate the disagreement by exploiting the ontological underdetermination. Namely, it will be argued that with a suitable choice of ontology, these theories are in fact time reversal invariant in the sense of Albert and Callender, in agreement with the standard view.
The collapse of the wave function remains one of the deepest puzzles in quantum mechanics. The Schrödinger equation is unitary and time-reversal symmetric, yet measurement requires an additional postulate that is neither—and we have no physical explanation for why. Existing interpretations either deny that collapse is real (Many-Worlds), treat it as purely subjective (QBism), or add stochastic noise by hand without deriving it from fundamental principles (GRW, CSL). We demonstrate that collapse is a real physical process requiring fundamentally irreversible dynamics. No purely unitary, time-symmetric theory can account for the objective suppression of macroscopic superpositions—irreversibility must be built into the dynamics from the start. We introduce a minimal extension of quantum mechanics through coupling to a universal scalar field (the I-field) governed by an explicit time-asymmetric field equation. Collapse emerges objectively through deterministic dissipative dynamics, with no reference to observers, measurement devices, or stochastic noise. By integrating out the I-field degrees of freedom, we derive effective Lindblad dynamics for quantum systems. The collapse rate scales quadratically with system mass, ensuring microscopic quantum coherence remains intact while macroscopic superpositions are dynamically suppressed. Unlike stochastic collapse models (GRW/CSL), the mechanism is deterministic and produces no spontaneous heating. Unlike gravitational collapse proposals (Diósi-Penrose), it provides explicit field equations rather than heuristic arguments. Unlike environmental decoherence, the irreversibility is fundamental rather than effective. The theory respects relativistic causality and makes testable predictions for current and near-future experiments in matter-wave interferometry, optomechanical systems, and molecular interferometry. Observation of mass-dependent decoherence without accompanying stochastic heating would provide strong evidence for the I-field mechanism. The framework establishes irreversibility as a fundamental interaction rather than an emergent phenomenon, providing a unified physical origin for both wave function collapse and the quantum arrow of time.