Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:42:24.411Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

QM and STR: The Combining of Quantum Mechanics and Relativity Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Storrs McCall
Storrs McCall*
Affiliation:
McGill University
*
†Send requests for reprints to the author, Department of Philosophy, McGill University, 855 Sherbrooke St. West, Montréal, Quebec, Canada H3A 2T7.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Combining quantum mechanics with special relativity requires (i) that a spacetime representation of quantum states be found; (ii) that such states, represented as extended along equal-time hyperplanes, be invariant when transformed from one frame to another; and (iii) that collapses of states be instantaneous in every frame. These requirements are met using branching spacetime, in which probabilities of outcomes are represented by the numerical proportions of branches on which the outcomes occur. Quantum states of systems are then identified with the probability values, built into spacetime along spacelike hypersurfaces, of all possible outcomes of all possible tests to which the systems can be subjected.

Type
Philosophy of Physics and Chemistry
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 67 , Issue S3: Supplement. Proceedings of the 1998 Biennial Meetings of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part II: Symposia Papers Sep., 2000 , 2000 , pp. S535 - S548
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albert, David Z. (1992), Quantum Mechanics and Experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohm, David (1952), “A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ‘Hidden’ Variables, I and II”, Physical Review 85: 166–179, 180–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohr, Niels (1949), “Discussion with Einstein on Epistemological Problems in Atomic Physics”, in Schilpp, P. A. (ed.), Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist. LaSalle, IL: Open Court, 201–241.Google Scholar
Cushing, James T. (1994), Quantum Mechanics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cushing, James T. (1996) (ed.), Bohmian Mechanics and Quantum Theory: An Appraisal. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeWitt, Bryce S. and Graham, Neill (1973), The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Fleming, Gordon N. (1988), “Lorentz-Invariant State Reduction and Localization”, in A. Fine and J. Leplin (eds.), PSA 1988, vol. 2: 112–126.Google Scholar
Fleming, Gordon N. (1996), “Just How Radical Is Hyperplane Dependence?”, in Clifton, R. (ed.), Perspectives on Quantum Reality. Dordrecht: Reidel, 11–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, Don (1989), “Holism, Separability, and the Metaphysical Implications of the Bell Arguments”, in Cushing, J. and McMullin, E. (eds.), Philosophical Consequences of Quantum Theory. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 224–253.Google Scholar
Maudlin, Tim (1994), Quantum Non-Locality and Relativity. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Maudlin, Tim. (1996), “Spacetime in the Quantum World”, in Cushing 1996, 285–307.Google Scholar
McCall, Storrs (1994), A Model of the Universe. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McCall, Storrs. (1995), “Time Flow, Non-Locality, and Measurement in Quantum Mechanics”, in Savitt, S. (ed.), Time's Arrows Today. New York: Cambridge University Press, 155–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wayne, Andrew (1997), Review of [Maudlin 1994], Noûs 31: 556–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar