Beyond Causal Explanation: Einstein’s Principle Not Reichenbach’s

Silberstein, Michael; Stuckey, W. M.; McDevitt, Timothy

doi:10.3390/e23010114

Cited by 7 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 71 publications

(104 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The first state

is called the “singlet state” and it is invariant under any of the SU(2) transformations

, or

, corresponding to rotations of the SG magnets about the x , y , or z axes, respectively (for computational details applicable to this section see [ 57 , 58 ]). This fact aligns with the signature of

in Equation ( 7 ).…”

Section: Implication For Entanglement Via the Bell Statesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most generally, Information Invariance and Continuity leads to “average-only” projection/transmission/ … between the different reference frames of mutually complementary qubit measurements [ 8 , 55 ]. In Section 4 , we review how this result leads to the counterintuitive “average-only” conservation characterizing quantum entanglement per the Bell states [ 56 , 57 , 58 ]. Thus, “average-only” conservation responsible for the Tsirelson bound is explained by conservation per Information Invariance and Continuity (conservation per NPRF in spacetime).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

No Preferred Reference Frame at the Foundation of Quantum Mechanics

Stuckey

McDevitt

Silberstein

2021

Entropy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantum information theorists have created axiomatic reconstructions of quantum mechanics (QM) that are very successful at identifying precisely what distinguishes quantum probability theory from classical and more general probability theories in terms of information-theoretic principles. Herein, we show how one such principle, Information Invariance and Continuity, at the foundation of those axiomatic reconstructions, maps to “no preferred reference frame” (NPRF, aka “the relativity principle”) as it pertains to the invariant measurement of Planck’s constant h for Stern-Gerlach (SG) spin measurements. This is in exact analogy to the relativity principle as it pertains to the invariant measurement of the speed of light c at the foundation of special relativity (SR). Essentially, quantum information theorists have extended Einstein’s use of NPRF from the boost invariance of measurements of c to include the SO(3) invariance of measurements of h between different reference frames of mutually complementary spin measurements via the principle of Information Invariance and Continuity. Consequently, the “mystery” of the Bell states is understood to result from conservation per Information Invariance and Continuity between different reference frames of mutually complementary qubit measurements, and this maps to conservation per NPRF in spacetime. If one falsely conflates the relativity principle with the classical theory of SR, then it may seem impossible that the relativity principle resides at the foundation of non-relativisitic QM. In fact, there is nothing inherently classical or quantum about NPRF. Thus, the axiomatic reconstructions of QM have succeeded in producing a principle account of QM that reveals as much about Nature as the postulates of SR.

show abstract

“…The first state

is called the “singlet state” and it is invariant under any of the SU(2) transformations

, or

, corresponding to rotations of the SG magnets about the x , y , or z axes, respectively (for computational details applicable to this section see [ 57 , 58 ]). This fact aligns with the signature of

in Equation ( 7 ).…”

Section: Implication For Entanglement Via the Bell Statesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

No Preferred Reference Frame at the Foundation of Quantum Mechanics

Stuckey

McDevitt

Silberstein

2021

Entropy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consequently, QM is as "complete as possible" given NPRF [25]. This extends to "average-only" conservation for a pair of spin entangled particles responsible for the "mystery" of entanglement.…”

Section: ]mentioning

confidence: 89%

"Mysteries" of Modern Physics and the Fundamental Constants $c$, $h$, and $G$

Stuckey,

McDevitt,

Silberstein

2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We review how the kinematic structures of special relativity and quantum mechanics both stem from the relativity principle, i.e., "no preferred reference frame" (NPRF). Essentially, NPRF applied to the measurement of the speed of light c gives the light postulate and leads to the geometry of Minkowski spacetime, while NPRF applied to the measurement of Planck's constant h gives "average-only" projection and leads to the denumerable-dimensional Hilbert space of quantum mechanics. These kinematic structures contain the counterintuitive aspects ("mysteries") of time dilation, length contraction, and quantum entanglement. In this essay, we extend the application of NPRF to the gravitational constant G and show that it leads to the "mystery" of the contextuality of mass in general relativity. Thus, we see an underlying coherence and integrity in modern physics via its "mysteries" and the fundamental constants c, h, and G.

show abstract

“…After this paper was largely completed, I came across Reference [ 47 ], where Silberstein, Stuckey, and McDevitt provide a principal (structural?) account of EPR correlations “by applying a generalization of the relativity principle (“no preferred reference frame,” NPRF) to the measurement of Planck’s constant h to underwrite the qubit Hilbert space structure with its SU(2)/SO(3) transformation properties” (p. 21).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On Explaining Quantum Correlations: Causal vs. Non-Causal

Felline¹

2021

Entropy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At the basis of the problem of explaining non-local quantum correlations lies the tension between two factors: on the one hand, the natural interpretation of correlations as the manifestation of a causal relation; on the other, the resistance on the part of the physics underlying said correlations to adjust to the most essential features of a pre-theoretic notion of causation. In this paper, I argue for the rejection of the first horn of the dilemma, i.e., the assumption that quantum correlations call for a causal explanation. The paper is divided into two parts. The first, destructive, part provides a critical overview of the enterprise of causally interpreting non-local quantum correlations, with the aim of warning against the temptation of an account of causation claiming to cover such correlations ‘for free’. The second, constructive, part introduces the so-called structural explanation (a variety of non-causal explanation that shows how the explanandum is the manifestation of a fundamental structure of the world) and argues that quantum correlations might be explained structurally in the context of an information-theoretic approach to QT.

show abstract

Beyond Causal Explanation: Einstein’s Principle Not Reichenbach’s

Cited by 7 publications

References 71 publications

No Preferred Reference Frame at the Foundation of Quantum Mechanics

No Preferred Reference Frame at the Foundation of Quantum Mechanics

"Mysteries" of Modern Physics and the Fundamental Constants $c$, $h$, and $G$

On Explaining Quantum Correlations: Causal vs. Non-Causal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About