arXiv:physics/9906030

An Interpretation of Quantum Logic

Charles Francis

Published Jun 15, 1999• 1 citation

Abstract

It is argued that the orthodox interpretation of quantum mechanics is in conflict with the objective existence of space-time, and suggested that kets are labels which name real states of matter but do not directly describe them. Position is a relationship between particles which necessarily contains uncertainty. The principle of superposition is seen as a definitional truism in the naming of states. The description of space in quantum logic resolves the measurement problem of quantum mechanics and related paradoxes such as Schrodinger's cat by attributing the collapse of the wave function to information.

DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.physics/9906030

Related papers

A Theory of Quantum Space-time

Charles Francis

An interpretation and re-formulation of modern physics which removes the presumption of the space-time continuum, and bases physical theory on a small number of rational and empirical principles. After briefly describing the philosophical principles underlying the theory, we rigorously construct a discrete model of quantum mechanics. Kets are names, or labels which categorise states of matter but do not directly describe them. The principle of superposition is seen as a definitional truism in the categorisation of states. This resolves the measurement problem of quantum mechanics by attributing the collapse of the wave function to information. The probability interpretation has a natural meaning in which the configuration of interacting particles plays the role of a hidden variable. The model supports a form of relativistic quantum field theory which does not depend on quantisation or second quantisation from classical mechanics. Continuous laws of wave mechanics are found in a discrete metaphysic which does not involve waves. Classical law is the expected behaviour of many elementary particles. The constraints on the theory are sufficient to establish that particles are point-like entities with specific properties found in nature. Newton's first law and conservation of momentum are established from the principle of homogeneity. Maxwell's equations are derived from the simple interaction in which a Dirac particle emits or absorbs a photon. Feynman rules are calculated for the discrete theory and differ from the standard rules by the removal of the ultraviolet divergence and the use of proper loop integrals. They give finite and unambiguous results.

arXiv:physics/9905058May 30, 19995 citations

The EPR paradox, hidden variables, and Bell's theorem

Marlan O. Scully, Muhammad Suhail Zubairy

Quantum mechanics is an immensely successful theory, occupying a unique position in the history of science. It has solved mysteries ranging from macroscopic superconductivity to the microscopic theory of elementary particles and has provided deep insights into the nature of vacuum on the one hand and the description of the nucleon on the other. Whole new fields such as quantum optics and quantum electronics owe their very existence to this body of knowledge. However, despite the stunning successes of quantum mechanics, there is no general agreement on the conceptual foundations and interpretation of the subject. The theory provides unambiguous information about the outcome of a measurement of a physical object. However, many feel that it does not provide a satisfactory answer to the nature of the “reality” we should attribute to the physical objects between the acts of measurement. The conceptual difficulty comes about because the wave function |ψ〉 is usually given by a coherent superposition of various distinguishable experimental outcomes. If we denote the collection of states that represent the possible outcomes of an experiment by |ψ j 〉, then |ψ〉 = ∑ j c j |ψ j 〉 where c j = 〈ψ j |ψ〉. The probability of the outcome |ψ j 〉 is P j =|c j | 2 . In the process of measurement, the so called collapse of the wave function takes place and a single, definite state |ψ i 〉 of the physical object is chosen. The difficulty comes about in the interpretation of the mechanism by which this definite state is chosen from amongst all the possible outcomes.

Cambridge University Press eBooksSep 4, 19971 citation

Quantum time and spatial localization

Francis S. G. Von Zuben

The concept of position and its measurement are fundamental to modern navigation technology as well as to theoretical physics. Nevertheless, a consistent notion of position has not been found in modern physics because of apparent inconsistencies between quantum mechanics and relativity. In quantum mechanics the probability distribution for a particle's position is determined by its wave function. A wave function strictly localized in space describes a particle within that locality, and nowhere else. But the quantum equations of motion predict the function will disperse, after any length of time at all, to occupy all space. Therefore the theoretical prediction is that, shortly after detection in a laboratory, a particle may be found anywhere in the universe, including regions requiring faster-than-light travel to reach. This contradicts the theory of relativity, which precludes a body traveling faster than the speed of light. The conflict arises from unexamined assumptions regarding the time of the measurement event and the time of the system under measurement. The prevailing view in physics is that time is only a parameter, having a definite value, describing dynamic changes in physical systems. This view endures even though quantum mechanics recognizes position as a quantum variable with inherent uncertainty, and relativity indicates that time should be placed on the same footing as position. But if time is recognized as a quantum variable with inherent uncertainty, the conceptual problems with position are resolved. The particle has finite probability of being in the past (or future) of the observer, while the quantum mechanical operator describing the position measurement contains a term which extrapolates from the intrinsic time of the particle to the time of the observer. Being potentially well in the past of the measurement event, the particle has time to travel to remote regions without exceeding the speed of light, and the conflict with relativity is resolved. A relativistic quantum theory can therefore be constructed incorporating a well-defined concept of position.

IEEE/ION Position Location and Navigation SymposiumNov 7, 20020 citations

The Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

Habatwa Vincent Mweene

In this paper, we demonstrate how the interpretation of quantum mechanics due to Landé resolves the Schrödinger cat paradox and disposes of the problem of wave function collapse.

arXiv:quant-ph/0411061Nov 9, 20040 citations

A Philosophical Evaluation of Quantum Mechanics and the Measurement Problem

Wasilat Opeoluwa Lasisi

For over a century, scientists have been fascinated by the strange behaviour of matter at the quantum level, where particles can exist in many states at once and affect each other instantly across distances. This paper explores this realm of quantum mechanics by focusing on wave–particle duality, superposition, entanglement and the measurement problem. It shows how these concepts defy the foundations of clas-sical physics to challenge assumptions about determinism, locality, interconnection and objectivity. The paper maintains that although quantum theory works remarkably well, we lack a clear account of what kind of reality it describes, as major interpretations such as Copenhagen, Many-Worlds and objective collapse still struggle to match quantum theory’s success with a clear picture of reality. yet as its major interpretations offer com-peting and unresolved pictures of the world. Schrödinger’s cat illustrates this tension to showcase how macroscopic systems can expose the limits of observation and the line be-tween classical and quantum worlds. The paper concludes that these quantum principles are underpinned by both technical and philosophical challenges and they force us to re-think causality and the role of the observer in explaining reality.

Feb 1, 20260 citations

Relational Quantum Mechanics and the

Matthew J. Brown

Quantum mechanics describes certain systems as being in superpositions of their properties, yet every measurement on every system that we are able to perform yields a determinate result. The “orthodox” formulation of the theory builds this in by including a postulate that such superpositions “collapse” at the time of measurement. This strategy fails to really explain why such measurements are determinate, is unacceptably imprecise, and makes observation basic in fundamental physical theory, which looks like the wrong sort of process for the job. The problem of the interpretation of quantum mechanics is the problem of finding a more satisfactory understanding of the formalism in This project began in an independent study with Craig Callender, who provided much help in terms of direction, discussion, comments, and continuing support. Thanks also to Jerey Barrett for reading and commenting on an earlier draft of this paper, including helping me find some clearer and more economical way of putting some crucial points.

Jan 1, 20070 citations