Skip to main content
Log in

Retrodiction in quantum mechanics, preferred Lorentz frames, and nonlocal measurements

  • Published:
Foundations of Physics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We examine, in the context of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm gedankenexperiment, problems associated with state reduction and with nonlocal influences according to different interpretations of quantum mechanics, when attempts are made to apply these interpretations in the relativistic domain. We begin by considering the significance of retrodiction within four different interpretations of quantum mechanics, and show that three of these interpretations, if applied in a relativistic context, can lead to ambiguities in their description of a process. We consider ways of dealing with these ambiguities, in particular focussing on the “preferred frame” hypothesis. We then re-examine an argument involving nonlocal measurements which claimed that the preferred frame hypothesis is not tenable, and show that this argument does not in fact necessitate a rejection of the preferred frame. We then suggest that, to avoid confusion, the preferred frame could be extended to cover unitary interactions as well as state reductions. We conclude with a brief examination of a proposal that state reduction should take effect across the backward light cone of a measurement event.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Y. Aharonov and D. Z. Albert,Phys. Rev. D 21, 3316 (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Y. Aharonov and D. Z. Albert,Phys. Rev. D 24, 359 (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  3. K. E. Hellwig and K. Kraus,Phys. Rev. D 1, 566 (1970).

    Google Scholar 

  4. N. Bohr,Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge (Science Editions, New York, 1961).

    Google Scholar 

  5. P. A. M. Dirac,The Principles of Quantum Mechanics (Oxford University Press, London, 1958).

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. von Neumann,Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1955).

    Google Scholar 

  7. D. Bohm,Phys. Rev. 85, 166 (1952).

    Google Scholar 

  8. D. Bohm and B. J. Hiley,The Undivided Universe: An Ontological Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (Routledge, London, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  9. P. R. Holland,The Quantum Theory of Motion (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  10. For a review, see R. Omnès,Rev. Mod. Phys. 64, 339 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  11. See, for example, M. Gell-Mann, and J. B. Hartle, inProceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Foundations of Quantum Mechanics in the Light of New Technology, S. Kobayashiet al., eds. (Physical Society of Japan, Tokyo, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  12. R. B. Griffiths,J. Stat. Phys. 36, 219 (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  13. See ref 8, Chap. 10.

    Google Scholar 

  14. A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen,Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935); D. Bohm,Quantum Theory (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1951), pp. 611–623.

    Google Scholar 

  15. R. B. Griffiths,Am. J. Phys. 55, 11 (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  16. R. B. Griffiths,Found. Phys. 23, 1601 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  17. J. S. Bell,Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  18. See, for example, A. Aspect, J. Dalibard, and G. Roger,Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1804 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Y. Aharonov and D. Z. Albert,Phys. Rev. D 29, 228 (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  20. I. Prigogine,From Being to Becoming (Freeman, San Francisco, 1980), p. 207.

    Google Scholar 

  21. J. P. Vigier, “Nonlocal Quantum Potential Interpretations of Relativistic Action at a Distance in Many-Body Problems,” inOpen Questions in Quantum Physics, G. Tarozzi and A. van der Merwe, eds. (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1985).

    Google Scholar 

  22. P. Droz-Vincent,Phys. Rev. D 19, 702 (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  23. K. R. Popper,Quantum Theory and the Schism in Physics (Hutchinson, London, 1982).

    Google Scholar 

  24. A. Valentini,On the Pilot-Wave Theory of Classical, Quantum, and Subquantum Physics, PhD Thesis, International School for Advanced Studies, Trieste (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  25. G. J. Smith and R. Weingard,Found. Phys. 17, 149 (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  26. L. D. Landau and R. Peierls,Z. Phys. 69, 56 (1931).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Y. Aharonov, D. Z. Albert, and L. Vaidman,Phys. Rev. D 34, 1805 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  28. S. Popescu and L. Vaidman,Phys. Rev. A 49, 4331 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cohen, O., Hiley, B.J. Retrodiction in quantum mechanics, preferred Lorentz frames, and nonlocal measurements. Found Phys 25, 1669–1698 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02057882

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02057882

Keywords

Navigation