In the framework of quantum field theory, one finds multiple load-bearing locality and causality conditions. One of the most important is the cluster decomposition principle, which requires that scattering experiments conducted at large spatial separation have statistically independent results. The principle grounds a number of features of quantum field theory, especially the structure of scattering theory. However, the statistical independence required by cluster decomposition is in tension with the long-range correlations characteristic of entangled states. In this paper, we argue that cluster decomposition is best stated as a condition on the dynamics of a quantum field theory, not directly as a statistical independence condition. This redefinition avoids the tension with entanglement while better capturing the physical significance of cluster decomposition and the role it plays in the structure of quantum field theory.
In the framework of quantum field theory, one finds multiple load-bearing locality and causality conditions. One of the most important is the cluster decomposition principle, which requires that scattering experiments conducted at large spatial separation have statistically independent results. The principle grounds a number of features of quantum field theory, especially the structure of scattering theory. However, the statistical independence required by cluster decomposition is in tension with the long-range correlations characteristic of entangled states. In this paper, we argue that cluster decomposition is best stated as a condition on the dynamics of a quantum field theory, not directly as a statistical independence condition. This redefinition avoids the tension with entanglement while better capturing the physical significance of cluster decomposition and the role it plays in the structure of quantum field theory.
Recent works in foundations of quantum (field) theory and relativistic quantum information try to better grasp the interplay between the structure of quantum correlations and the constraints imposed by causality on physical operations. Chapter 1 is dedicated to the study of the conceptual implications of quantum nonlocality, a concept that subsumes that of entanglement in a certain way. We detail the recent information-theoretic approaches to understanding the structure of nonlocal correlations, and the issues the latter raise concerning the ability of local observers to isolate a system from its environment. Chapter 2 reviews in what sense imposing Poincare invariance affects entanglement detection and quantification procedures. This invariance ultimately forces a description of all quantum systems within the framework of quantum field theory, which leads to the impossibility of localized finite-energy states and to the divergence of all entanglement measures for local observers. We provide a solution to these two problems by showing that there exists a generic equivalence between a finite spatial resolution of the measurement apparatus and the exclusion of high-energy degrees of freedom from the definition of the observed system. This equivalence allows for an epistemic interpretation of the standard quantum formalism describing nonrelativistic localized systems and their correlations, hence a clarification of the origin of the finite measures of entanglement between such systems. Chapter 3 presents a recent theoretical framework that predicts the existence of correlations with indefinite causal order. In analogy to the information-theoretic approaches to nonlocal correlations, we introduce some principles that constrain the structure of such correlations, which is a first step toward a clear understanding of their physical origin.
This work presents an interpretive framework in which quantum entanglement is understood as a manifestation of correlations in a continuous underlying field structure, rather than as a non-local linkage between discrete particles. Within standard quantum mechanics and quantum field theory, the framework introduces a co-scaling field τ(x,t), representing local temporal and structural scaling, and a disturbance field ϵ(x,t), capturing path-dependent and environmental perturbations. In this view, entanglement corresponds to the non-factorizability of the global field state across spatial regions, while decoherence arises from ϵ-induced degradation of phase coherence and correlation accessibility. The τ–ϵ decomposition provides a unified interpretation of interference, entanglement, and decoherence as different aspects of the same underlying field dynamics. The framework is consistent with established results, including Bell inequality violations and open-system dynamics, and connects naturally to experimentally relevant notions such as phase noise and channel-induced decoherence. Rather than modifying the formalism of quantum theory, this work offers a physically grounded interpretation linking quantum correlations to medium structure and propagation effects, with potential relevance to both foundational theory and applied domains.
Abstract Quantum mechanics and relativity are two of the most successful theoretical frameworks in modern physics, yet their conceptual foundations remain difficult to reconcile at the deepest level. Quantum theory describes physical systems through states, observables, probabilities, measurement contexts, superposition, entanglement, and nonclassical correlations. Relativity describes physical processes through space-time structure, causal order, invariant physical law, observer-dependent decomposition of time and space, and constraints on signal propagation. This article examines the conceptual relationship between quantum measurement, relativistic causality, and space-time description. The purpose is not to present a mathematical unification but to analyze how the two frameworks organize physical explanation differently and where their interpretive tensions arise. Special attention is given to the measurement problem, the status of quantum states, the role of observers and reference frames, the meaning of locality, the distinction between correlation and causal influence, and the challenge of describing quantum processes without privileging a single global time. The article argues that many apparent conflicts between quantum theory and relativity result from importing classical intuitions into domains where they no longer apply. Quantum entanglement does not permit controllable faster-than-light communication, yet it challenges classical separability. Relativity forbids superluminal signaling, yet it does not require that all physically meaningful correlations be reducible to local classical properties. Measurement introduces another difficulty because standard quantum theory often describes state update in a way that appears instantaneous, while relativistic space-time does not provide a universal present. The discussion develops a conceptual framework in which quantum measurement is treated as a physical interaction, relativistic causality as a constraint on operational influence, and space-time description as an organizing structure for events rather than a simple background stage. This analysis is relevant for quantum field theory, quantum information, relativistic quantum foundations, and future approaches to quantum gravity.
What theoretical structures characterise our notions of what it means for a whole physical system to be the sum of its parts? We explore various aspects of this question, with emphasise on quantum theory, from the following perspective: A physical theory constitutes the definition of a set of propositions with logical relationships between them such that probabilities can be used to judge the merits of the theory, given empirical evidence. The logical relationships between the propositions characterise our semantic notions such as individuation. We distinguish between the ontological and epistemological notions of individuation. We introduce the notion of ontological individuation within the context of ontological models. A subsystem is defined as a proposition that provides necessary and sufficient information for making useful predictions. This definition to some extent generalises the notions of separability and local causality to define systems that may not be local. It highlights the unified motivations for many assumptions in the literature, such as measurement independence, and points to hidden assumptions of causality and mutual exclusivity that occur when defining systems. An epistemic no-signalling criterion gives rise to a tensor product structure for epistemic systems in quantum theory. We utilise a symmetry emergent from this structure to derive a bound on the observability of a large class of operations, dependent on only the purity of the quantum state. In particular, we derive an upper bound on the trace distance between an untransformed state and the state transformed by any trace preserving, unital operation. Our notions of epistemic systems also relate to distinguishability. It is shown that for measurements of any two (_nite outcome) particle quantum numbers on multi-fermion states, the total uncertainty, minimised over all states, is zero. This is because despite indistinguishability characterised as a constraint on the observable algebra, the appropriate correspondence between states of distinguishable and indistinguishable particles is one where the Hilbert space of indistinguishable particles relates to particles with an extra quantum number such that effective distinguishability can emerge. This Hilbert space is larger than the one for distinguishable particles and hence can (does) contain states for which the uncertainty relations for distinguishable particles are no longer valid. We conclude by arguing that in general, epistemic systems are not necessarily distinguishable; They may be only effectively distinguishable. This would imply a theory of indistinguishable modes. Several motivations are presented and the form of the theory suggested. It is hypothesised that such a theory may provide a relativistic quantum theory, alternative to quantum field theory, that satisfies cluster decomposition.
Abstract Bell’s theorem demonstrates that any physical theory that is consistent with the predictions of quantum mechanics, and which satisfies some apparently innocuous assumptions, must violate the principle of local causality . It may therefore be possible to maintain local causality by rejecting one of these other assumptions instead. One possibility that has recently received significant attention involves rejecting the principle of statistical independence (SI). In this paper, we consider the frequency interpretation of SI, which states that ρ(λ)≈ρ(λ∣Z) , where ρ(λ) is the relative frequency of an element of an ensemble being in the state λ , and Z is a label that separates the ensemble into apparently randomly selected sub-ensembles. SI is violated when the sub-ensemble frequency ρ(λ∣Z) fails to be representative of the ensemble frequency ρ(λ) . We argue that physical theories that systematically violate SI should all be understood as superdeterministic . This perspective on SI sheds light on a number of issues that are being debated in the superdeterminism literature, especially concerning its scope and philosophical consequences. Regarding scope, we argue that superdeterministic theories fall into three categories, deterministic theories with fine-tuned initial conditions, fluke theories, and nomic exclusion theories. We also argue that retrocausal and invariant set theories need not violate SI, which is contrary to how they are normally presented. Regarding philosophical implications, we argue that superdeterminism is incompatible with free will according to some prominent compatibilist accounts. We also argue that although superdeterminism is conspiratorial, it is not unscientific, but pre-scientific.