Abstract
Modal interpretations are hidden-variables theories, specifying at each time a set of possible properties of a system (represented by projection operators) and a probability measure over that set. We argue that there is no Lorentz-invariant dynamics governing the evolution of a system’s possessed properties in several types of modal interpretation. We also discuss why our argument is not already covered by existing arguments against Lorentz-invariant hidden-variables theories.
We thank Tim Budden and F. A. Muller for considerable correspondence on an earlier draft of this paper. We thank Laura Ruetsche for rooting out an error in an earlier version of the argument (in section 2) that Lorentz-transformations for compound systems whose components are not interacting are represented by tensor-products of the Lorentz-transformations of the constituent systems. Thanks also to Dennis Dieks and Pieter Vermaas for comments and to Rivka Kfia for alerting us to an error in Appendix B.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Aharanov, Y. and Albert, A. (1981): “Can We Make Sense of the Measurement Process in Relativistic Quantum Mechanics?”, Physical Review Letters 24, 337–359.
Bacciagaluppi, G. and Dickson, M. (1997): “Modal Interpretations With Dynamics”, University of Cambridge and Indiana University preprint.
Bacciagaluppi, G., Donald, M., and Vermaas, R. (1995): “Continuity and Discontinuity of Definite Properties in the Modal Interpretation”, Helvetica Physica Acta 68, 679–704.
Bell, J. (1987): “Beables for Quantum Field Theory”, pp. 173–180 in Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).
Berndl, K. and Goldstein, S. (1994): “Comment on ‘Quantum Mechanics, Local Realistic Theories, and Lorentz-Invariance Realistic Theories’”, Physical Review Letters 72, 780.
Berndl, K., Dürr, D., Goldstein, S., and Zanghì N. (1996) “Nonlocality, Lorentz Invariance, and Bohmian Quantum Theory”, Physical Review A 53, 2062–2073.
Bell, J. and Clifton, R. (1995): “QuasiBoolean Algebras and Simultaneously Definite Properties in Quantum Mechanics”, International Journal of Theoretical Physics 34, 2409–2421.
Bohm, D. (1952): “A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ‘Hidden’ Variables, I and II”, Physical Review 85, 166–193.
Bohm, D. and Hiley, B. (1993): The Undivided Universe: An Ontological Interpretation of Quantum Theory (Routledge, London).
Bub, J. (1992): “Quantum Mechanics Without the Projection Postulate”, Foundations of Physics 22, 737–754.
Bub, J. (1995): “On the Structure of Quantal Proposition Systems”, Foundations of Physics 24, 1261–279.
Bub, J. (1997): Interpreting the Quantum World (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).
Bub, J. and Clifton, R. (1996): “A Uniqueness Theorem for Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 27b, 181–219.
Clifton, R. (1995): “Independently Motivating the Kochen-Dieks Modal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46, 33–57.
Clifton, R. (1996): “The Properties of Modal Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 47, 371–398.
Clifton, R., Pagonis, C., and Pitowksy, I. (1992): pp. 114–128 in “Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, and EPR”, in D. Hull, M. Forbes, and K. Okruhlik (eds.), The Philosophy of Science Association 1992, Vol. I (Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, Michigan).
Clifton, R. and Niemann, P. (1992): “Locality, Lorentz Invariance, and Linear Algebra: Hardy’s Theorem for Two Entangled Spin-s Particles”, Physics Letters A 166, 177–194.
Cushing, J. (1994): “Locality/Separability: Is This Necessarily a Useful Distinction?”, pp. 107–116 in D. Hull, M. Forbes, and R. Burian (eds.), The Philosophy of Science Association 1994, Vol I (Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, Michigan).
Dickson, M. (1995a): “Faux-Boolean Algebras, Classical Probability, and Determinism”, Foundations of Physics Letters 8, 231–242.
Dickson, M. (1995b): “Faux-Boolean Algebras and Classical Models”, Foundations of Physics Letters 8, 401–415.
Dickson, M. (1997): “On the Plurality of Dynamics: Transition Probabilities and Modal Interpretations”, forthcoming in R. Healey and G. Hellman (eds.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science.
Dieks, D. (1988): “The Formalism of Quantum Theory: An Objective Description of Reality?”, Annalen der Physik 7, 174–190.
Dieks, D. (1989): “Quantum Mechanics Without the Projection Postulate and Its Realistic Interpretation”, Foundations of Physics 19, 1397–1423.
Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., and Rosen, N. (1935): “Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?”, Physical Review 47, 777–780.
Fine, A. (1970): “Insolubility of the Quantum Measurement Problem”, Physical Review D 2, 2783–2787.
Fleming, G. (1989): “Lorentz Invariant State Reduction and Localization”, pp. 112–126 in A. Fine and J. Leplin (eds.), The Philosophy of Science Association 1988, Vol. II (Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, Michigan).
Hardy, L. (1992): “Quantum Mechanics, Local Realistic Theories, and Lorentz-Invariant Realistic Theories”, Physical Review Letters 68, 2981–2984.
Healey, R. (1989): The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics: An Interactive Interpretation (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).
Jarrett, J. (1984): “On the Physical Significance of the Locality Conditions in the Bell Arguments”, Noûs 18, 569–589.
Jones, M. and Clifton, R. (1993): “Against Experimental Metaphysics”, pp. 295–316 in P. French, T. Uehling, and H. Wettstein (eds.), Midwest Studies in Philosophy Vol. 18 (University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, Indiana).
Kochen, S. (1979): “The Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics”, unpublished manuscript.
Kochen, S. (1985): “A New Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics”, pp. 151–170 in P. Lahti and P. Mittelstaedt (eds.), Symposium on the Foundations of Modem Physics (World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore).
Maudlin, T. (1994): Quantum Non-Locality and Relativity (Blackwell, Oxford).
Pitowsky, I. (1989): Quantum Probability—Quantum Logic (Springer-Verlag, Berlin).
Redhead, M. (1986): “Relativity and Quantum Mechanics-Conflict or Peaceful Coexistence?”, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 480, 14–20.
Shimony, A. (1986): “Events and Processes in the Quantum World”, pp. 182–203 in R. Penrose and C. Isham (eds.), Quantum Concepts in Space and Time (Clarendon Press, Oxford).
Valentini, A. (1991a): “Signal-Locality, Uncertainty, and the Subquantum H-Theorem. I’, Physics Letters A 156, 5–11.
Valentini, A. (1991b): “Signal-Locality, Uncertainty, and the Subquantum H-Theorem. II’, Physics Letters A 158, 1–8.
van Praassen, B. (1979): “Hidden Variables and the Modal Interpretation of Quantum Theory”, Synthese 42, 155–165.
van Praassen, B. (1991): Quantum Mechanics: An Empiricist View (Clarendon Press, Oxford).
van Praassen, B. (1997): “Modal Interpretation of Repeated Measurement: Rejoinder to Leeds and Healey”, forthcoming in Philosophy of Science.
Vermaas, P. (1996): “Unique Transition Probabilities for the Modal Interpretation”, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 27B, 133–159.
Vermaas, P. and Dieks, D. (1995): “The Modal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics and Its Generalization to Density Operators”, Foundations of Physics 25, 145–158.
Weinberg, S. (1995): The Quantum Theory of Fields (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England).
Wigner, E. (1931): Gruppentheorie und ihre Anwendung auf die Quantenmechanik der Atomspektren (F. Vieweg & Sohn Akt.-Ges., Braunschweig).
Zimba, J. and Clifton, R. (1998): “Valuations on Functionally Closed Sets of Quantum-Mechanical Observables and Von Neumann’s No-Hidden-Variables Theorem”, this volume.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1998 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dickson, M., Clifton, R. (1998). Lorentz-Invariance in Modal Interpretations. In: Dieks, D., Vermaas, P.E. (eds) The Modal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. The Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science, vol 60. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5084-2_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5084-2_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-6135-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-011-5084-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive