Non linear interpretations of QM and string theory?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the compatibility of non-linear interpretations of quantum mechanics (QM), such as the GRW and transactional interpretations, with string theory. Participants explore theoretical implications, predictions, and the nature of these interpretations in relation to established quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that all interpretations of QM, including non-linear ones, make the same actual predictions and are therefore equally compatible with string theory.
  • Others argue that the compatibility of these interpretations with string theory is an open question, as the standard mathematics of QM has not been derived from string theory.
  • A participant mentions that Lubos Motl stated that non-linear interpretations are not compatible with string theory, raising questions about the nature of these interpretations and their predictions.
  • It is noted that the GRW interpretation is claimed to make different predictions from standard QM, while the transactional interpretation is said to make the same predictions but introduces a backwards in time wave that breaks linearity.
  • Some participants suggest that the transactional interpretation could still be compatible with string theory since it maintains the same predictions as standard QM, despite being non-linear.
  • There is a discussion about whether the backwards in time wave in the transactional interpretation actually breaks linearity, with one participant asserting that linearity is broken by absorption rather than backwards propagation.
  • Another participant mentions that the original quantum state in the transactional interpretation is linear, but linearity breaks when the confirmation wave is generated, and suggests that this interpretation could relate to theories of quantum gravity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the compatibility of non-linear interpretations with string theory, with no consensus reached. Some agree on the transactional interpretation's compatibility due to its predictions aligning with standard QM, while others challenge this perspective.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights unresolved questions regarding the predictions of non-linear interpretations and their implications for string theory. There are also ambiguities regarding the definitions and characteristics of these interpretations, particularly in relation to linearity and absorption.

Nickyv2423
Messages
46
Reaction score
3
Are interpretations that are non linear with respect to the wave function (eg. GRW, transactional) compatible with string theory?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
All interpretations make the same actual predictions, so they are all equally compatible with string theory. How compatible that actually is is an open question: nobody has derived the standard math of QM from string theory, although it is widely believed that it can be done.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba
PeterDonis said:
All interpretations make the same actual predictions, so they are all equally compatible with string theory. How compatible that actually is is an open question: nobody has derived the standard math of QM from string theory, although it is widely believed that it can be done.
When I asked Lubos Motl, he told me that interpretations that are non linear with respect to the wave function are not compatible with string theory.
 
Nickyv2423 said:
When I asked Lubos Motl, he told me that interpretations that are non linear with respect to the wave function are not compatible with string theory.

Did he explain why? Did he say that such interpretations make different physical predictions from standard QM? If they do, they're not interpretations, they're different theories.
 
PeterDonis said:
Did he explain why? Did he say that such interpretations make different physical predictions from standard QM? If they do, they're not interpretations, they're different theories.
He said that they do. But the GRW interpretation is the only one that makes different predictions. The transactional interpretation makes the same predictions as QM (as I've been told) but just adds the backwards in time wave which breaks the linearity.
 
Nickyv2423 said:
He said that they do. But the GRW interpretation is the only one that makes different predictions. The transactional interpretation makes the same predictions as QM (as I've been told) but just adds the backwards in time wave which breaks the linearity.
So I guess that the transactional interpretation is compatible even though it's non linear, because it still makes the same predictions (again at least what John Cramer says)
 
Nickyv2423 said:
I guess that the transactional interpretation is compatible even though it's non linear, because it still makes the same predictions

That's what I would say, yes.
 
Nickyv2423 said:
The transactional interpretation makes the same predictions as QM (as I've been told) but just adds the backwards in time wave which breaks the linearity.
I don't think that backwards in time wave, as such, breaks the linearity. In transactional interpretation linearity is broken by absorption, not by backwards propagation.
 
PeterDonis said:
That's what I would say, yes.
Demystifier said:
I don't think that backwards in time wave, as such, breaks the linearity. In transactional interpretation linearity is broken by absorption, not by backwards propagation.
The original quantum state according the transactional interpretation is linear. But linearity with the shrodinger equation breaks when the confirmation wave is generated. But it still makes the same predictions as standard QM.
However, according to the interpretation, spacetime together with its metric structure emerges by way of transactions, so this can be a theory of quantum gravity.
So can it still be compatible with string theory?
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Entanglement in QM interpretations
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Graduate Can the double slit experiment distinguish between QM interpretations?
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
6K
Undergrad Realistic interpretation of QM
  • · Replies 109 ·
4
Replies
109
Views
11K
Graduate Interpreting QM without Schrödinger's equation
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
5K
Undergrad The TSVF interpretation of quantum mechanics
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Undergrad Is there any interpretation of QM that doesn't clash with intuition?
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Undergrad Can I take the transactional interpretation seriously?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Undergrad QFT made Bohmian mechanics a non-starter: missed opportunities?
  • · Replies 376 ·
13
Replies
376
Views
24K
Graduate Smolin: Realistic and anti-realistic interpretations of QM
  • · Replies 115 ·
4
Replies
115
Views
15K
Graduate How does Bohmian Mechanics actually replicate QM?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K