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

arXiv:quant-ph/9609007

Defending Time-Symmetrized Quantum Theory

Lev Vaidman A

Published Sep 7, 1996• 9 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Recently, several authors have criticized time-symmetrized quantum theory originated by the work of Aharonov et al. (1964). The core of this criticism was the proof, which appeared in various forms, showing that counterfactual interpretation of time-symmetrized quantum theory cannot be reconciled with the standard quantum theory. I argue here that the apparent contradiction appears due to inappropriate usage of traditional time asymmetric approach to counterfactuals, and that the contradiction disappears when the problem is analyzed in terms of time-symmetric counterfactuals. I analyze various aspects of time-symmetry of quantum theory and defend the time-symmetrized formalism.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/9609007

Related papers

Time-Symmetrized Counterfactuals in Quantum Theory

Lev Vaidman A

Recently, several authors have criticized the time-symmetrized quantum theory originated by the work of Aharonov et al. (1964). The core of this criticism was a proof, appearing in various forms, which showed that the counterfactual interpretation of time-symmetrized quantum theory cannot be reconciled with standard quantum theory. I argue here that the apparent contradiction is due to a logical error. I analyze the concept of counterfactuals in quantum theory and introduce time-symmetrized counterfactuals. These counterfactuals do not lead to any contradiction with the predictions of quantum theory. I discuss applications of time-symmetrized counterfactuals to several surprising examples and show the usefulness of the time-symmetrized quantum formalism.

arXiv:quant-ph/9807075•Jul 27, 1998•8 citations

Defending Time-Symmetrized Quantum Counterfactuals

Lev Vaidman A

Recently, several authors have criticized the time-symmetrized quantum theory originated by the work of Aharonov et al. (1964). The core of this criticism was a proof, appearing in various forms, which showed that the counterfactual interpretation of time-symmetrized quantum theory cannot be reconciled with standard quantum theory. I, (Vaidman, 1996a, 1997) have argued that the apparent contradiction is due to a logical error and introduced consistent time-symmetrized quantum counterfactuals. Here I repeat my arguments defending the time-symmetrized quantum theory and reply to the criticism of these arguments by Kastner (1999).

arXiv:quant-ph/9811092•Nov 30, 1998•15 citations

Time-Symmetrized Quantum Theory

Lev Vaidman A

A brief review of the time-symmetrized quantum formalism originated by Aharonov, Bergmann and Lebowitz is presented. Symmetry of various measurements under the time reversal is analyzed. Time-symmetrized counterfactuals are introduced. It is argued that the time-symmetrized formalism demonstrates novel profound features of quantum theory and that recent criticism of the formalism is unfounded.

arXiv:quant-ph/9710036•Fortschritte der Physik•Nov 1, 1998•15 citations

Time-Symmetrized Quantum Theory and Counterfactuals

Ruth E. Kastner

Recent authors have raised objections to the counterfactual interpretation of the Aharonov-Bergmann-Lebowitz (ABL) rule of time symmetrized quantum theory (TSQT). L. Vaidman has responded to those objections by proposing a new kind of time-symmetrized counterfactual, which he has defined in two different ways. It is argued that both definitions are problematic, and that the ABL rule cannot in general be used counterfactually. In particular, it is shown that Vaidman's counterargument to the Sharp and Shanks inconsistency proof fails. However, it is possible to retain a meaningful counterfactual reading of the ABL rule in a limited special case. This special case, which falls under a class identified by Cohen and Hiley, is discussed from a time-symmetry standpoint.

Fortschritte der Physik•Nov 1, 1998•1 citation

The Rise and Fall of Time-Symmetrized Quantum Mechanics

W. David Sharp, Niall Shanks

In the context of a discussion of time symmetry in the quantum mechanical measurement process, Aharonov et al. (1964) derived an expression concerning probabilities for the outcomes of measurements conducted on systems which have been pre- and postselected on the basis of both preceding and succeeding measurements. Recent literature has claimed that a resulting “time-symmetrized” interpretation of quantum mechanics has significant implications for some basic issues, such as contextuality and determinateness, in elementary, nonrelativistic quantum mechanics. Bub and Brown (1986) have shown that under the standard interpretation of the aforementioned expression, these claims employ ensembles which are not well defined. It is argued here that under a counterfactual interpretation of the expression, these claims may be understood as employing well-defined ensembles; it is shown, however, that such an interpretation cannot be reconciled with the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics.

Philosophy of Science•Sep 1, 1993•41 citations

Discussion: Time-Symmetric Quantum Counterfactuals

Lev Vaidman A

There is a trend to consider counterfactuals as invariably time-asymmetric. Recently, this trend manifested itself in the controversy about validity of counterfactual application of a time-symmetric quantum probability rule. Kastner (2003) analyzed this controversy and concluded that there are time-symmetric quantum counterfactuals which are consistent, but they turn out to be trivial. I correct Kastner's misquotation of my defense of time-symmetric quantum counterfactuals and explain their non-trivial aspects, thus contesting the claim that counterfactuals have to be time-asymmetric.

arXiv:1401.6281•Jan 24, 2014•2 citations
Recently, several authors have criticized time-symmetrized quantum theory originated by the work of Aharonov et al. (1964). The core of this criticism was the proof, which appeared in various forms, showing that counterfactual interpretation of time-symmetrized quantum theory cannot be reconciled with the standard quantum theory. I argue here that the apparent contradiction appears due to inappropriate usage of traditional time asymmetric approach to counterfactuals, and that the contradiction disappears when the problem is analyzed in terms of time-symmetric counterfactuals. I analyze various aspects of time-symmetry of quantum theory and defend the time-symmetrized formalism.
Recently, several authors have criticized the time-symmetrized quantum theory originated by the work of Aharonov et al. (1964). The core of this criticism was a proof, appearing in various forms, which showed that the counterfactual interpretation of time-symmetrized quantum theory cannot be reconciled with standard quantum theory. I argue here that the apparent contradiction is due to a logical error. I analyze the concept of counterfactuals in quantum theory and introduce time-symmetrized counterfactuals. These counterfactuals do not lead to any contradiction with the predictions of quantum theory. I discuss applications of time-symmetrized counterfactuals to several surprising examples and show the usefulness of the time-symmetrized quantum formalism.
Recently, several authors have criticized the time-symmetrized quantum theory originated by the work of Aharonov et al. (1964). The core of this criticism was a proof, appearing in various forms, which showed that the counterfactual interpretation of time-symmetrized quantum theory cannot be reconciled with standard quantum theory. I, (Vaidman, 1996a, 1997) have argued that the apparent contradiction is due to a logical error and introduced consistent time-symmetrized quantum counterfactuals. Here I repeat my arguments defending the time-symmetrized quantum theory and reply to the criticism of these arguments by Kastner (1999).
Recent authors have raised objections to the counterfactual interpretation of the Aharonov-Bergmann-Lebowitz (ABL) rule of time symmetrized quantum theory (TSQT). L. Vaidman has responded to those objections by proposing a new kind of time-symmetrized counterfactual, which he has defined in two different ways. It is argued that both definitions are problematic, and that the ABL rule cannot in general be used counterfactually. In particular, it is shown that Vaidman's counterargument to the Sharp and Shanks inconsistency proof fails. However, it is possible to retain a meaningful counterfactual reading of the ABL rule in a limited special case. This special case, which falls under a class identified by Cohen and Hiley, is discussed from a time-symmetry standpoint.
In the context of a discussion of time symmetry in the quantum mechanical measurement process, Aharonov et al. (1964) derived an expression concerning probabilities for the outcomes of measurements conducted on systems which have been pre- and postselected on the basis of both preceding and succeeding measurements. Recent literature has claimed that a resulting “time-symmetrized” interpretation of quantum mechanics has significant implications for some basic issues, such as contextuality and determinateness, in elementary, nonrelativistic quantum mechanics. Bub and Brown (1986) have shown that under the standard interpretation of the aforementioned expression, these claims employ ensembles which are not well defined. It is argued here that under a counterfactual interpretation of the expression, these claims may be understood as employing well-defined ensembles; it is shown, however, that such an interpretation cannot be reconciled with the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics.
There is a trend to consider counterfactuals as invariably time-asymmetric. Recently, this trend manifested itself in the controversy about validity of counterfactual application of a time-symmetric quantum probability rule. Kastner (2003) analyzed this controversy and concluded that there are time-symmetric quantum counterfactuals which are consistent, but they turn out to be trivial. I correct Kastner's misquotation of my defense of time-symmetric quantum counterfactuals and explain their non-trivial aspects, thus contesting the claim that counterfactuals have to be time-asymmetric.