Advertisement

A Spacetime Ontology Compatible with Quantum Mechanics

  • Roderick I. SutherlandEmail author
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Abstract

The ontology proposed in this paper is aimed at demonstrating that it is possible to understand the counter-intuitive predictions of quantum mechanics while still retaining much of the framework underlying classical physics, the implication being that it is better to avoid wandering into unnecessarily speculative realms without the support of conclusive evidence. In particular, it is argued that it is possible to interpret quantum mechanics as simply describing an external world consisting of familiar physical entities (e.g., particles or fields) residing in classical 3-dimensional space (not configuration space) with Lorentz covariance maintained.

Keywords

Quantum mechanics Foundations Realism Bohm model Bell’s theorem Retrocausality 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I would like thank Henry Stapp for inviting me to contribute to this volume – happy 90th birthday Henry! I feel it is also important to acknowledge here the commendable open-mindedness shown by Henry in inviting others to present viewpoints differing from his.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The author states that there is no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Aharonov, Y., Albert, D. Z., & Vaidman, L. (1988). How the result of a measurement of a component of the spin of a spin-1/2 particle can turn out to be 100. Physical Review Letters, 60, 1351–1354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell, J. S. (1964). On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox. Physics, 1, 195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bohm, D. (1952). A suggested interpretation of quantum theory in terms of “hidden” variables. I and II. Physical Review, 85, 166–179, 180–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Price, H., & Wharton, K. B. (2015). Disentangling the quantum world. Entropy, 17, 7752–7767 arXiv:1508.01140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Sutherland, R. I. (1983). Bell's theorem and backwards-in-time causality. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 22, 377–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Sutherland, R. I. (1998). Density formalism for quantum theory. Foundations of Physics, 28, 1157–1190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Sutherland, R. I. (2015a). Lagrangian description for particle interpretations of quantum mechanics: Single-particle case. Foundations of Physics, 45, 1454–1464 arXiv:1411.3762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Sutherland, R. I. (2015b). Naïve quantum gravity. arXiv:1502.02058.Google Scholar
  9. Sutherland, R. I. (2017). Lagrangian description for particle interpretations of quantum mechanics: Entangled many-particle case. Foundations of Physics, 47, 174–207 arXiv:1509.02442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Neuroscientia 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for TimeUniversity of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations