Does ST provide causation to QM?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter csmcmillion
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Qm
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the relationship between String Theory (ST) and Quantum Mechanics (QM), specifically whether ST provides a causal mechanism for events in QM such as neutron decay and electron transitions. Participants explore the nature of causation in these contexts, examining deterministic versus probabilistic interpretations.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that QM does not currently provide a causal explanation for events like neutron decay, which occur randomly without predictability.
  • Others mention that standard string theory is probabilistic, similar to QM, but Bohmian interpretations offer a deterministic view, including the timing of decay events.
  • A participant requests references for calculating the decay time of a neutron using Bohmian mechanics.
  • It is suggested that while Bohmian mechanics can describe the process deterministically, measuring the necessary quantities to predict decay is problematic as it alters the system.
  • Some participants discuss the relationship between neutron decay and the weak force, noting that it involves particle creation and questioning how this fits into a deterministic framework.
  • There are references to literature that discusses tunneling in QM and its relation to neutron decay, but concerns are raised about the applicability of deterministic QM in cases involving particle creation.
  • One participant highlights that weak decays can be likened to tunneling, involving virtual particles, but another clarifies that this comparison is not a formal technique.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether String Theory or Bohmian mechanics can provide a satisfactory causal explanation for quantum events. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing interpretations and no consensus reached.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in measuring quantities related to neutron decay without affecting the system, and there is uncertainty regarding the applicability of deterministic models to processes involving particle creation and annihilation.

csmcmillion
Messages
63
Reaction score
2
I have a cursory understanding of QM which (as far as I know) fails to provide causation for certain events such as neutron decay and electron leaps to lower orbits. My understanding is that there is (currently) no know "cause" for these, and other, events - they simply happen. We cannot, for example, predict when a particular neutron will decay. I'm wondering if current String Theory provides a causal mechanism for such events?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Standard string theory is probabilistic, just as standard QM and QFT. However, there are also Bohmian versions of those which give a deterministic description of events, including the time of decay. For superstring theory in the Bohmian formulation see
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/0702060
 
Demystifier said:
...there are also Bohmian versions of those which give a deterministic description of events, including the time of decay...http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/0702060

I'd be interested in a reference to a work that shows for a given neutron what to measure and how then to compute the time at which the neutron will decay.
 
While the process is deterministic (with Bohm), there is no way to predict it - you cannot measure the quantities required for that, without changing the system (here: the neutron).
 
In any event is there a reference that clarifies the quantities that are involved and the process by which the decay event occurs based on the quantities. I assume they are related to the quark-gluon process that is a neutron?
 
mfb said:
While the process is deterministic (with Bohm), there is no way to predict it - you cannot measure the quantities required for that, without changing the system (here: the neutron).
True, except perhaps with a weak measurement, recently used to measure photon Bohmian trajectories in a laboratory:
https://www.physicsforums.com/blog.php?b=3077
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So is there a reference that clarifies the quantities that are involved and the process by which the decay event occurs based on the quantities?
 
Xristy, you probably know that spontaneous decay in QM can be described as tunnelling. A Bohmian description of tunnelling is presented in several sections of the book
P. R. Holland, The Quantum Theory of Motion
 
Demystifier said:
Xristy, you probably know that spontaneous decay in QM can be described as tunnelling. A Bohmian description of tunnelling is presented in several sections of the book
P. R. Holland, The Quantum Theory of Motion

I thought that neutron decay was via the weak force involving (in one mode) the creation of an electron and electron anti-neutrino along with a proton.

I didn't know that it could be explained via QM tunneling.

Holland doesn't talk about the weak force and since there is particle creation I don't understand that a deterministic QM would be immediately applicable.
 
  • #10
Weak decays have a concept similar to tunneling, as they can be described with a short-living virtual W boson, which serves as an energy barrier.

Writing down the DeBroglie-Bohm interpretation with particle creation+annihilation is a bit tricky, but it is possible. MWI is deterministic as well, and particle creation and annihilation are nothing special there.
 
  • #11
xristy said:
I thought that neutron decay was via the weak force involving (in one mode) the creation of an electron and electron anti-neutrino along with a proton.

I didn't know that it could be explained via QM tunneling.

Holland doesn't talk about the weak force and since there is particle creation I don't understand that a deterministic QM would be immediately applicable.
You are right, that kind of decay requires particle creation and destruction, which Holland does not talk about. As mfb said, Bohmian description of particle creation and destruction is tricky, but possible. See e.g.
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/0904.2287 [Int. J. Mod. Phys. A25:1477-1505, 2010]
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1205.1992 [Chapter 8. of a recent book]
 
Last edited:
  • #12
mfb said:
Weak decays have a concept similar to tunneling, as they can be described with a short-living virtual W boson, which serves as an energy barrier.

Please provide a reference to this technique. I've searched through various texts on QFT and the Standard Model and can't find an explanation of how to carry through your idea.
 
  • #13
This is not a technique, but a hand-wavy comparison. Howevery, it allows to see why the top-quark is so short-living compared to the other quarks (and their mesons): The top-quark has enough energy to decay into a real b-quark and a real W boson. The other quarks cannot do this, the W in their decay has to be virtual, which supresses the decay (and makes the weak interaction "weak" - at the electroweak scale, it is not weaker than the electromagnetic interaction).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 76 ·
3
Replies
76
Views
6K
  • · Replies 473 ·
16
Replies
473
Views
32K