Advertisement

Causal Markov, Robustness and the Quantum Correlations

  • Mauricio SuárezEmail author
  • Iñaki San PedroEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Synthese Library book series (SYLI, volume 347)

Abstract

It is still a matter of controversy whether the Principle of the Common Cause (PCC) can be used as a basis for sound causal inference. It is thus to be expected that its application to quantum mechanics should be a correspondingly controversial issue. Indeed the early 1990s saw a flurry of papers addressing just this issue in connection with the EPR correlations. Yet, that debate does not seem to have caught up with the most recent literature on causal inference generally, which has moved on to consider the virtues of a generalised PCC-inspired condition, the so-called Causal Markov Condition (CMC). In this paper we argue that the CMC is an appropriate benchmark for debating possible causal explanations of the EPR correlations. But we go on to take issue with some pronouncements on EPR by defenders of the CMC.

Keywords

Quantum Mechanic Small Disturbance Causal Interpretation Bohmian Mechanic Causal Hypothesis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

A preliminary draft of this paper was circulated in discussion paper form at the Centre for the Philosophy of the Natural and Social Sciences, London School of Economics (M. Suárez and I. San Pedro, “EPR, Robustness and the Causal Markov Condition”, LSE Philosophy Papers PP/04/07, 19 August 2007). We would like to thank all those who offered comments and suggestions, in particular Daniel Steel and Carl Hoefer. Research towards this paper has been funded throughout by research project HUM2005-01787-C01-03 of the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science. We would like to thank the members of its associated 2005 reading group on causal inference, as well as three anonymous referees for helpful comments and suggestions.

References

  1. Bell, J. S. (1982), On the impossible pilot wave, Foundations of Physics, 12, 989–999. Reprinted in Bell (1987), Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 159–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berkovitz, J. (2007), Action at a distance in quantum mechanics, In E.N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2008 Edition), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2008/entries/qm-action-distance/>.
  3. Bohm, D. (1952) “A suggested interpretation of quantum theory in terms of hidden variables, I and II”. Physical Review, 85, 166–193 and 369–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bohm, D. and Hiley, B. (1989), Non-locality and locality in the stochastic interpretation of quantum mechanics, Physics Reports, 172(3), 93–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bohm, D. and Hiley, B. (1993), The Undivided Universe. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Butterfield, J. (1990), Causal independence in EPR arguments. In Proceedings of the Bienal Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, vol. I, pp. 213–25.Google Scholar
  7. Butterfield, J. (1992) David Lewis meets John Bell. Philosophy of Science, 59, 26–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cartwright, N. (1990) Quantum causes: The lesson of the Bell inequalities. In Philosophy of the Natural Sciences: Proceedings of the 13th International Wittgenstein Symposium. Vienna: Hölderlin-Pichler-Tempsky.Google Scholar
  9. Cartwright, N. (1993), Marks and probabilities: Two ways to find causal structure. In F. Stadler, (ed.), Scientific Philosophy: Origins and Developments, Yearbook 1/93, Institute Vienna Circle. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  10. Cartwright, N. (1999), Causal diversity and the markov condition,. Synthese, 121, 3–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cartwright, N. (2002), Against modularity, the causal markov condition, and any link between the two: Comments on Hausman and Woodward. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 53, 411–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cartwright, N. and Jones, M. (1991), How to hunt quantum causes. Erkenntnis, 35, 205–231.Google Scholar
  13. Cartwright, N. and Suárez, M. (2000) A causal model for EPR. Discussion paper 50/00, LSE Centre for the Philosophy of the Natural and Social Sciences.Google Scholar
  14. Chang, H. and Cartwright, N. (1993) Causality and realism in the EPR experiment. Erkenntnis, 38, 169–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cushing, J. T. (1994), Quantum Mechanics, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  16. Dewdney, C., Holland, P., Kyprianidis, A. and Vigier, J. P. (1988) Spin and non-locality in quantum mechanics, Nature, 336(8), 536–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Einstein, A., Podolsky, B. and Rosen, N. (1935), Can a quantum mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Physical Review, 47, 777–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Elby, A. (1992) Should we explain the EPR correlations causally? Philosophy of Science, 56, 16–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Elby, A. (1993), Why local realistic theories violate, nontrivially, the quantum mechanical EPR perfect correlations. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 44, 213–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fine, A. (1982a), Hidden variables, joint probability, and the Bell inequalities. Physical Review Letters, 48, 291–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fine, A. (1982b), Joint distributions, quantum correlations, and commuting observables. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 23, 1306–1310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Glymour, C., Spirtes, P. and Scheines, R. (1991), Causal inference. Erkenntnis, 35, 151–189.Google Scholar
  23. Hausman, D. (1999), Lessons from quantum mechanics. Synthese, 121, 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hausman, D. M. and Woodward, J. (1999), Independence, invariance and the Causal Markov condition. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 50, 521–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Healey, R. (1992a), Causation, robustness, and EPR, Philosophy of Science, 59, 282–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Healey, R. (1992b), Chasing quantum causes: how wild is the goose? Philosophical Topics, 20, 181–204.Google Scholar
  27. Heisenberg, W. (1958), Physics and Philosophy. New York, Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  28. Hoefer, C. (2004), Causality and determinism: Tension, or outright conflict? Revista de Filosofía, 29, 99–115.Google Scholar
  29. Holland, P. (1993), The Quantum Theory of Motion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Maudlin, T. (1994), Quantum Non-Locality and Relativity. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  31. Papineau, D. (1990), Causes and mixed probabilities,. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 4, 79–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Redhead, M. (1987), Incompleteness, Nonlocality and Realism. Oxford: Oxford Calrendon Press.Google Scholar
  33. Redhead, M. (1989), The nature of reality, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 40, 429–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Salmon, W. (1984), Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Shimony, A. (1984), Controllable and uncontrollable non-locality. In Kamefuchi et al. (ed.), Proceedings of the International Symposium: Foundations of Quantum Mechanics in the Light of New Technology, pp. 225–30. Tokyo: Physical Society of Japan.Google Scholar
  36. Skyrms, B. (1984), EPR: Lessons for metaphysics. In P. A. French, and Uehling, T. E. Jr (eds.), Causation and Causal Theories. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, vol 9, pp. 245–255. Minneapolis University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  37. Sober, E. (2001), Venetian sea levels, British bread prices and the principle of the common cause, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 52, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Spirtes, P., Glymour, C., and Scheines, R. (eds.), (2000 [1993]), Causation, Prediction and Search, 2nd edition, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  39. Steel, D. (2005), Indeterminism and the Causal Markov condition, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 56, 3–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Steel, D. (2006), Comment on Hausman and Woodward on the Causal Markov condition, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 57, 219–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Suárez, M. (2007), Causal inference in quantum mechanics: A reassessment”. In Russo, F., and Williamson, J. (eds.), Causality and Probability in the Sciences, pp. 65–106. London: College Publications.Google Scholar
  42. Suppes, P. and Zanotti, M. (1981), When are probabilistic explanations possible? Synthese, 48, 191–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. van Fraassen, B. C. (1982), The Charybdis of Realism: Epistemological Implications of Bell’s Inequality. Synthese, 52, 25–38. Reprinted with corrections in J. Cushing and McMullin, E (eds.), Philosophical Consequences of Quantum Theory, Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. von Neumann, J. (1955), Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Princeton: Princeton University Press. First published in German in 1932 as Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik, Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  45. Williamson, J. (2005) Bayesian Nets and Causality: Philosophical and Computational Foundations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Netherlands 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Logic and Philosophy of ScienceComplutense University of MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations