Is QM Deterministic in MWI and Time Reversible?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter entropy1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Determinism Mwi Qm
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Quantum mechanics (QM) is fundamentally causal but indeterministic, particularly in the context of the Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI). Time-reversal invariance is not universally applicable due to the violation of symmetries in weak interactions. The discussion highlights that while MWI is deterministic, the interpretation of causality and determinism in QM is complex and dependent on definitions. The general principle of causality asserts that effects occur later than their causes, which is essential for meaningful physics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Quantum Mechanics (QM) principles
  • Familiarity with the Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI)
  • Knowledge of time-reversal invariance and weak interactions
  • Basic grasp of causality in physical theories
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of weak interactions on time-reversal symmetry in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the Many-Worlds Interpretation and its deterministic nature
  • Investigate the definitions of causality and determinism in quantum theories
  • Read Schwinger's "Quantum Mechanics" for a deeper understanding of causality in quantum theory
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, quantum mechanics students, and researchers interested in the foundations of quantum theory and the implications of interpretations like MWI on determinism and causality.

  • #31
vanhees71 said:
to find a consistent description of all phenomena (including a quantum description of gravity)
How could this ever be done without treating the universe as a quantum system?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
We have a classical model of the universe without having ever observed it as a whole. There's also some philosophical debate, whether cosmology is really science since it assumes the Copernican principle without being ever able to test this hypothesis by observation or at least only to a certain extent.

That's why it is so complicated to get a clue about the quantum theory of gravitation: To get an idea, how to describe it, I think we'd need some phenomena related to it, and such phenomena are available to us only in a quite small piece of the universe, i.e., sufficiently close to us. Maybe we need strong gravitational fields to see deviations from classical behavior like better and better observations of black holes in our and other galaxies. Who knows?
 
  • #33
vanhees71 said:
We have a classical model of the universe without having ever observed it as a whole.
Therefore we can also expect to work successfully with a quantum model of the universe without having ever observed it as a whole. The thermal interpretation gives it a workable interpretation without weird, counterintuitive features.
 
  • #34
You are always referring to the "universe as a whole" not I ;-)).
 
  • #35
vanhees71 said:
You are always referring to the "universe as a whole" not I ;-)).
Sure, we can model the universe as a whole without having observed the whole universe.

We also model a univariate function as a whole already when we observed it only at a fairly small number of points. Otherwise we couldn't use the concept of a function in physics. Modeling an infinitely extended universe is not really different in principle from modeling an infinitely extended function.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
860
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
4K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
4K
  • · Replies 117 ·
4
Replies
117
Views
12K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 70 ·
3
Replies
70
Views
7K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
9K