Rovelli’s Relational Quantum Mechanics, Anti-Monism, and Quantum Becoming

Abstract

In this paper I present and defend Rovelli's relation quantum mechanics (RQM) from some foreseeable objections, so as to clarify its philosophical implications vis a vis rival interpretations. In particular I will ask whether RQM presupposes a hidden recourse to both a duality of evolutions and of ontology (the relationality of quantum world and the intrinsicness of the classical world, which in the limit must be recovered from the former). I then concentrate on the pluralistic, antimonistic metaphysical consequences of the theory, due to the impossibility of assigning a state to the quantum universe. Finally, in the last section I note interesting consequences of RQM with respect to the possibility of defining a local, quantum relativistic becoming (in flat spacetimes).Given the difficulties of having the cosmic form of becoming that would be appropriate for priority monism, RQM seems to present an important advantage with respect to monistic views, at least insofar as far as the possibility of explaining our experience of time is concerned.

Can We Make Sense of Relational Quantum Mechanics?

“…Smerlak Rovelli (2007) claim that a subjective interpretation is required for RQM, i.e. that probabilities would merely correspond to degrees of credence, but Dorato (2013) suggests instead a dispositional interpretation, where events have dispositions to produce other events, and measurements are the stimulus. An alternative dispositional account, more in line with the Heisenberg picture, would be to interpret operators at any time as dispositional entities, attributed to the interaction between the observer and the object, whose stimulus and manifestations are events.…”

“…Healey (2012)'s pragmatist approach also share some similarities. Rovelli's interpetation has been discussed, among others, by Dorato (2013); Bitbol (2010); Van Fraassen (2010); Dieks (2009);Brown (2009);Laudisa (2001). However it remains a minority view, and the fact that it is not clear to everyone what the interpretation says exactly might be part of the reasons why.…”

The Notion of Locality in Relational Quantum Mechanics

“…The relational interpretation has not yet answered all the intriguing questions raised by quantum mechanics [6]. However, a lot of work has already been achieved in the recent years, which accounts for an increasing interest in the approach [16,17]. Indeed, we believe this interpretation is a very promising framework to think about the essential features of quantum physics, as we have shown with the example of non-locality in this article.…”

‘Space is blue and birds fly through it’

“…There are several objections that come naturally to mind when one first encounters relational QM, which seem to render it inconsistent. These have been long discussed and have all been convincingly answered, see in particular the detailed arguments in van Fraassen [17] and Dorato [20] and the original paper [12]; I will not re-discuss them here. Relational QM is a consistent interpretation of quantum theory.…”