Skip to main content
Log in

Can the Causal Paradoxes of QM be Explained in the Framework of QED?

  • Published:
Foundations of Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Attemts to explain causal paradoxes of Quantum Mechanics (QM) have tried to solve the problems within the framework of Quantum Electrodynamics (QED). We will show, that this is impossible. The original theory of QED by Dirac (Proc Roy Soc A117:610, 1928) formulated in its preamble four preliminary requirements that the new theory should meet. The first of these requirements was that the theory must be causal. Causality is not to be derived as a consequence of the theory since it was a precondition for the formulation of the theory; it has been constructed so that it be causal. Therefore, causal paradoxes logically cannot be explained within the framework of QED. To transcend this problem we should consider the following points: Dirac himself stated in his original paper (1928) that his theory was only an approximation. When he returned to improve the theory later (Proc Roy Soc A209, 1951), he noted that the new theory “involves only the ratio e/m, not e and m separately”. This is a sign that although the electromagnetic effects (whose source is e) are magnitudes stronger than the gravitational effects (whose source is m), the two are coupled. Already in 1919, Einstein noted that “the elementary formations which go to make up the atom” are influenced by gravitational forces. Although in that form the statement proved not to be exactly correct, the effects of gravitation on QM phenomena have been established. The conclusion is that we should seek a resolution for the causal paradoxes in the framework of the General Theory of Relativity (GTR)—in contrast to QED, which involves only the Special Theory of Relativity (STR). We show that causality is necessarily violated in GTR. This follows from the curvature of the space-time. Although those effects are very small, one cannot ignore their influence in the case of the so-called “paradox phenomena”.

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

  • Bell J.S. (1967) On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox, Physics 1: 195

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohm D., Aharonov Y. (1957) Discussion of experimental proof for the paradox of Einstein, Rosen and Podolsky. Physical Review 108: 1070–1076

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castellani E. (2004) Dirac on gauges and constraints. International Journal of Theoretical Physics 43(6): 1503–1514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dirac P.A.M. (1928) The quantum theory of the electron. Proceedings of the Royal Sociey of London A 117: 610–624

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dirac P.A.M. (1929) A theory of electrons and protons. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A 126: 360–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dirac P.A.M. (1930) The principles of quantum mechanics. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Dirac P.A.M. (1951) A new classical theory of electrons. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A 209: 291–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dirac P.A.M. (1964) Lectures on quantum mechanics. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Einstein, A. (1919) Spielen Gravitationsfelder in Aufber der materiellen Elementarteilchen eine wesentliche Rolle? Sitzungsberichte der Preussischen Akad. D. Wissenschaften, 82, 1919, 349–356. (English translation: Do gravitational fields play an essential part in the structure of the elementary particles of matter? In Dover (1952) The Principle of Relativity (pp. 191–198)).

  • Einstein A., Podolsky B., Rosen N. (1935) Can quantum mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?. Physical Review 47: 777–780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fine, A. (1991). Inequalities for nonideal correlation experiments. Foundations of Physics, 21, 3. http://www.springerlink.com/content/n4u55357401q6u2l/fulltext.pdf

  • Fine A., Szabó L.E. (2002) A local hidden variable theory for the GHZ experiment. Physics Letters A 295: 229–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szabó L.E. (2000a) On an attempt to resolve the EPR-Bell paradox via Reichenbachian concept of common cause. International Journal of Theoretical Physics 39: 911

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szabó L.E. (2000b) On Fine’s resolution of the EPR-Bell problem. Foundations of Physics 30: 1891–1909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szabó, L. E. (2008). The Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen argument and the Bell inequalities, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to György Darvas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Darvas, G. Can the Causal Paradoxes of QM be Explained in the Framework of QED?. Found Sci 14, 273–280 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-009-9159-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-009-9159-x

Keywords

Navigation