CTCs Violate No-Cloning: Implications for QM & GR

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bcrowell
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

CTCs (Closed Timelike Curves) violate the no-cloning theorem, presenting a significant conflict between general relativity and quantum mechanics. This violation suggests that CTCs, which function as time machines, could allow for measurements that bypass the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The implications of this finding challenge the reliability and model-independence of quantum mechanics in the presence of CTCs, as discussed in the referenced papers from arXiv.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Closed Timelike Curves (CTCs)
  • Familiarity with the no-cloning theorem in quantum mechanics
  • Knowledge of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle
  • Basic principles of general relativity
NEXT STEPS
  • Read the paper "CTCs violate no-cloning" on arXiv (http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.0221)
  • Explore the implications of CTCs on quantum mechanics and general relativity
  • Investigate the concepts of holography and unitarity in relation to CTCs
  • Study the paper "Holography, unitarity implies chronology" on arXiv (http://arxiv.org/abs/0911.3893)
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, quantum mechanics researchers, and anyone interested in the intersection of general relativity and quantum theory.

bcrowell
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
6,723
Reaction score
431
Apparently CTCs violate no-cloning: http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.0221

This seems like a big deal to me, since it shows a foundational conflict between general relativity (which generically permits CTCs, although perhaps they don't exist in our universe) and quantum mechanics (since without the no-cloning theorem you can presumably circumvent the Heisenberg uncertainty principle).

My skills aren't up to understanding the paper in depth. However, the result sort of seems plausible to me. A CTC is basically a time machine, so it seems like it would allow you to measure a particle's position, then go back in time and measure its momentum before it had been perturbed by the position measurement.

Since I'm not an expert in this field, I can't judge whether the result is really reliable and model-independent.
 
Physics news on Phys.org

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
13K