arXiv:hep-ph/9507330

Real and Virtual Strange Processes

Yogendra Narain Srivastava, A. Widom, Elisabetta Sassaroli

Published Jul 18, 1995• 3 citations

Abstract

Following notions of quantum mechanics as interpreted by the Copenhagen School, we make a distinction between measurements involving one or two virtual K mesons. New predictions result for the period of K oscillations at the Phi Factory.

DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.hep-ph/9507330

Related papers

Testing quantum mechanics in the neutral kaon system at a φ-factory

ANTONIO DI DOMENICO

Nuclear Physics BSep 1, 199552 citations

T and CPT symmetries in entangled neutral meson systems

J. Bernabéu

Genuine tests of an asymmetry under T and/or CPT transformations imply the interchange between in-states and out-states. I explain a methodology to perform model-independent separate measurements of the three CP, T and CPT symmetry violations for transitions involving the decay of the neutral meson systems in B- and Φ-factories. It makes use of the quantum-mechanical entanglement only, for which the individual state of each neutral meson is not defined before the decay of its orthogonal partner. The final proof of the independence of the three asymmetries is that no other theoretical ingredient is involved and that the event sample corresponding to each case is different from the other two. The experimental analysis for the measurements of these three asymmetries as function of the time interval Δt > 0 between the first and second decays is discussed, as well as the significance of the expected results. In particular, one may advance a first observation of true, direct, evidence of Time-Reserval-Violation in B-factories by many standard deviations from zero, without any reference to, and independent of, CP-Violation. In some quantum gravity framework the CPT-transformation is ill-defined, so there is a resulting loss of particle-antiparticle identity. This mechanism induces a breaking of the EPR correlation in the entanglement imposed by Bose statistics to the neutral meson system, the so-called ω -effect. I present results and prospects for the ω -parameter in the correlated neutral meson-antimeson states.

arXiv:1104.1056Journal of Physics Conference SeriesDec 28, 201121 citations

The Loop Opens: Energy Input as the Physical Mechanism of Quantum Measurement Disturbance

Ryan Weber

We propose a purely physical resolution to the quantum measurement problem. In the Loop Interpretation of the Settling Field framework, a particle is energy at c moving along a closed geometric path it cannot exit — imprisoned by its own speed in the curvature of the vacuum field V(φ) = β(e^{2φ} − 1 − 2φ). The difference between a photon and an electron is not their fundamental nature but the geometry of their path: one open, one closed. E = mc² is not a conversion formula. It is the energy cost of one closed loop of light.Measurement disturbs the particle not because observation selects from a superposition but because injecting energy physically opens the closed loop, momentarily converting the particle to radiant energy. The open path explores all available geometries simultaneously at c, then re-closes at the location of strongest geometric resonance in the combined field of particle and apparatus. What the Copenhagen Interpretation calls wavefunction collapse is a physical sequence: loop opens, explores, re-closes. The Born rule is not a postulate about fundamental indeterminacy. It is a map of resonance condition strengths across the measurement apparatus geometry.This reframing is consistent with all existing quantum mechanical predictions and with the body of optomechanical back-action experiments confirming that disturbance scales quantitatively with measurement energy across two orders of magnitude. Back-action-evading measurement — in which energy is injected in a mode geometrically orthogonal to the loop’s closure condition — is explained without paradox. The quantum Zeno effect follows trivially from repeated loop opening and re-closure without invoking observation as a causal agent.The paper makes one new prediction that distinguishes the Loop Interpretation from both Copenhagen and Many-Worlds: the disturbance-versus-cooperativity curve for quantum back-action measurements should show a stiffness inflection at a characteristic cooperativity C* determined by V’’(φ_n) at the particle’s fold position. For the electron at fold position n = 0.722, below C* disturbance scales sublinearly with cooperativity; above C* it scales superlinearly. Copenhagen and Many-Worlds both predict smooth linear scaling throughout. The test requires no new experiments — only re-analysis of existing published optomechanics datasets on a log-log scale. The Steinberg group at the University of Toronto and the Aspelmeyer group in Vienna are identified as natural experimental contacts.The paper includes a parallel account of seven questions posed simultaneously to Many-Worlds and the Loop Interpretation — what is a particle, what is measurement, what is the wavefunction, why does measurement appear random, what is entanglement, what predictions does each make beyond standard quantum mechanics, and what is each framework’s ontological cost. The comparison is presented without commentary. Many-Worlds makes no predictions beyond Copenhagen and commits to an uncountably infinite proliferation of parallel universes. The Loop Interpretation makes one testable prediction and commits to one real scalar field with one free parameter. Many-Worlds is the right answer to the wrong question. The loop picture dissolves the collapse problem rather than solving it.Three gaps are honestly stated: the precise value of C* requires a full measurement of μ_vac from galaxy cluster weak lensing profiles; the coupling between the electromagnetic probe field and the loop closure geometry requires numerical computation; and the claim that quantum mechanics is deterministic at the zeptosecond scale is a prediction rather than a derivation.

Apr 16, 20260 citations

New Trends in Studies of the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Theory

O’Dae Kwon

Physics and High TechnologyMay 31, 20130 citations

On tests of local realism by CP-violation parameters of K0 mesons

Marco Genovese

arXiv:quant-ph/0501039The European Physical Journal CMay 30, 20055 citations

Can you do quantum mechanics without Einstein?

Kim, Y S, Marilyn E. Noz

The present form of quantum mechanics is based on the Copenhagen school of interpretation. Einstein did not belong to the Copenhagen school, because he did not believe in probabilistic interpretation of fundamental physical laws. This is the reason why we are still debating whether there is a more deterministic theory. One cause of this separation between Einstein and the Copenhagen school could have been that the Copenhagen physicists thoroughly ignored Einstein's main concern: the principle of relativity. Paul A. M. Dirac was the first one to realize this problem. Indeed, from 1927 to 1963, Paul A. M. Dirac published at least four papers to study the problem of making the uncertainty relation consistent with Einstein's Lorentz covariance. It is interesting to combine those papers by Dirac to make the uncertainty relation consistent with relativity. It is shown that the mathematics of two coupled oscillators enables us to carry out this job. We are then led to the question of whether the concept of localized probability distribution is consistent with Lorentz covariance.

Sep 17, 20064 citations