QM interpretation with something moving backward in time?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around interpretations of quantum mechanics (QM) that involve the concept of information potentially moving backward in time. Participants explore implications of entanglement and locality, questioning how these interpretations can avoid issues related to superluminal information transfer and simultaneity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty with the instantaneous effect of measurements on entangled particles, suggesting that information could travel backward in time to avoid superluminal implications.
  • Another participant references the transactional interpretation of QM, noting its lesser-known status compared to the pilot-wave interpretation and its potential for incorporating retrocausality.
  • A participant questions whether the pilot-wave interpretation allows for backward time movement, concluding that it does not.
  • Discussion includes a link to a resource discussing the influence of future events on past events, which may relate to the concept of retrocausality.
  • One participant challenges the classification of the transactional interpretation as non-local, suggesting that it could maintain locality by sacrificing counterfactual definiteness.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach consensus on the implications of different interpretations regarding locality and retrocausality. Multiple competing views remain, particularly concerning the transactional interpretation and its classification as non-local.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various interpretations of QM and their implications but do not resolve the complexities surrounding definitions of locality, counterfactual definiteness, and retrocausality.

thenewmans
Messages
168
Reaction score
1
It’s easy enough to find the interpretations that break counterfactual definiteness in order to maintain locality. But I’m not sure how to find the ones with something (perhaps information) moving backwards through time.

The reason I ask is I’ve always had trouble with the idea that a measurement on one entangled particle instantaneously affects the other. That’s because that implies simultaneity and a preferred inertial frame of reference. It also implies (something (info?) traveling superluminally. I’ve always thought you can avoid those issues by having the information travel backwards through time. That way, you can keep the information within the light cones of the 2 measurements. Chances are I’m not the first to think of this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Wow. Thanks Atyy. That was quick. So the pilot-wave interpretation doesn't include anything going backwards in time. Right?
 
Right, the pilot wave is a naive Newtonian interpretation. It works for non-relativistic QM and some relativistic QM, not yet sure whether it works for everything.

The transactional interpretation is much less studied than the pilot wave theory, so it is even less clear where it works or doesn't. You can look up Ruth Kastner's research for some current attempts at advancing the transactional interpretation.
 
thenewmans said:
It’s easy enough to find the interpretations that break counterfactual definiteness in order to maintain locality. But I’m not sure how to find the ones with something (perhaps information) moving backwards through time.

The reason I ask is I’ve always had trouble with the idea that a measurement on one entangled particle instantaneously affects the other. That’s because that implies simultaneity and a preferred inertial frame of reference. It also implies (something (info?) traveling superluminally. I’ve always thought you can avoid those issues by having the information travel backwards through time. That way, you can keep the information within the light cones of the 2 measurements. Chances are I’m not the first to think of this.

It's called retrocausality. I wrote a short Insight on it https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/retrocausality/
 
Atty: That page you linked to says “TIQM is explicitly non-local.” If the confirmation wave travels back to the emitter along the same path as the offer wave, then it stays within the future light cone of the emission event. It also stays within the past light cone of the measurement event. So why is TIQM considered non-local? I was thinking that counterfactual definiteness could be sacrificed in order to maintain locality.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_interpretation#Advances_over_previous_interpretations
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Is there any interpretation of QM that doesn't clash with intuition?
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Graduate Is the QT "no-cloning theorem" suitable as "Chronological Protection"?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Undergrad Valid local explanation of Bell violations? (Pegg et al., 1999; 2008)
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
Undergrad Understanding the Fundamental Difference in Interpretations of QM
  • · Replies 76 ·
3
Replies
76
Views
6K
Graduate Loophole-free test of local realism via Hardy's violation
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
7K
Undergrad Could Tim Maudlin's Views on Bell and QM Be Flawed?
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
6K
Graduate Does Everettian QM imply solipsism according to Travis Norsen and Sean Carroll?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
Undergrad Spooky action at a distance and various interpretations of QT
  • · Replies 81 ·
3
Replies
81
Views
8K
Undergrad How Does the Many-Worlds Interpretation Address Nonlocality?
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Graduate Realism from Locality? Bell's Theorem & Nonlocality in QM
  • · Replies 226 ·
8
Replies
226
Views
24K