Has this approach to non-locality been explored?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bcrelling
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Approach Non-locality
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of non-locality in quantum mechanics, particularly exploring the implications of observation and potential common causes for non-local events. Participants consider various interpretations and theories related to non-locality, including superdeterminism and retrocausality, while questioning the nature of time in quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that non-locality assumes observation causes an instantaneous effect elsewhere, but questions whether this causation is certain.
  • Another participant proposes that both non-local events might be determined by a common cause in the past, referencing superdeterminism as a related theory.
  • Time-symmetric and retrocausal interpretations are mentioned, with the idea that hidden variables could exist in the future.
  • A participant raises a question about the time invariance of quantum mechanics, suggesting that a common cause for non-local events could be a future effect influenced by both events.
  • The Many Worlds Interpretation is introduced, indicating that the evolution of the universe's wavefunction is deterministic and interpretation-dependent regarding time invariance.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the nature of non-locality and the role of time, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved with no consensus reached.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various interpretations and theories without fully resolving the implications of time invariance or the nature of causation in quantum mechanics. The discussion includes assumptions about the interpretations of quantum mechanics that may not be universally accepted.

bcrelling
Messages
69
Reaction score
2
Non-locality is based on the assumption that the act of observing causes an effect instantaniously elsewhere.

It occurred to me that we can't be certain that one thing(observing) is causing the other(non-local wave function collapse).

Another solution might be that both events are determined by a common cause in the past?
i.e the prexisteng conditions that make the non-local outcome also make sure an observation is made.

Has anyone heard of any theories that have explored this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
bcrelling said:
Another solution might be that both events are determined by a common cause in the past?
i.e the prexisteng conditions that make the non-local outcome also make sure an observation is made.

Has anyone heard of any theories that have explored this?

Yes. Google around for "superdeterminism", and search this forum for that term.
 
There are also time-symmetric and retrocausal interpretations as well. In those, the answer to "where are the hidden variables" is: they are in the future.
 
DrChinese said:
There are also time-symmetric and retrocausal interpretations as well. In those, the answer to "where are the hidden variables" is: they are in the future.

Thanks guys.

By the way, is QM time invariant?

If so, could the common cause which necessitates the non-local events coinciding, actually be a future effect which is caused by the interaction of both events(as causes become effects and effects become causes when looking at time backwards)?

An analogy might be your existence is a caused by the the decisions of both your father and your mother. However looking at time backwards your spermatazoon actually causes them to meet each other. Hence the non-local events in quantum mechanics cause a common effect in the future which only possible by their coinciding.
 
DrChinese said:
There are also time-symmetric and retrocausal interpretations as well. In those, the answer to "where are the hidden variables" is: they are in the future.

Exactly - nice way of putting it.

Thanks
Bill
 
bcrelling said:
By the way, is QM time invariant?

Well we have the Many Worlds Interpretation where everything happens deterministically and the wavefunction of the entire universe simply evolves and the law governing that doesn't change.

So the answer to that is its interpretation dependent - the actual axioms are silent on it.

Thanks
Bill
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Objective Wave Function and Non-locality
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
Undergrad Wave function of particle / quantum field in space, also in time?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Undergrad Locality and Wave Function Collapse Implications
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Graduate Collapse in QM: in conflict with SR?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Graduate Is non-locality a necessary consequence of the Bell theorem?
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
High School QFT & QM Questions (about time, locality, gravity, etc.)
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Graduate Is the Counterfactual Argument for Locality and Realism Flawed?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Graduate Pilot Wave Theory & Non-Locality
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
Undergrad Big Bell Test Collaboration: Challenging Local Realism with Human Choices
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Undergrad The notion of locality in (Quantum) Physics should be clearly defined
  • · Replies 175 ·
6
Replies
175
Views
13K