Advertisement

From Metaphysics to Physics and Back: the Example of Causation

Chapter
Part of the Synthese Library book series (SYLI, volume 347)

Abstract

The notion of causation seems especially apt for being a crossroad between physics and metaphysics, in view of a revived interest both for causal notions in general philosophical analysis in general and causal views of quantum mechanics. As far as the latter is concerned, interesting sort of questions naturally arise when the relation between nonlocality and causation is taken into account. Also on the basis of recent classifications of theories of causation, in the paper I first will draw some general remarks mainly of a methodological character, and I will then review the conditions under which nonlocality can be shown to seriously challenge the no-action-at-a-distance requirement that special-relativistic theories are usually thought to embody. In this connection I will turn then to recent work on causal models of EPR. Over and above the specific merits of these models – mainly concerning the refutation of ‘impossibility claims’ about causal models of quantum correlations – a question arises: what sort of conceptual advantage do we obtain in producing causal models for such correlations in absence of a deeper understanding of the overall structure of the theory? I will argue that the only way toward such an understanding may be to cast in advance the problems in a clear and well-defined interpretational framework – which means primarily to specify the ontology that quantum theory is supposed to be about – and after to wonder whether problems that seemed worth pursuing still are so in the framework.

As a consequence, in the last two sections I will refer to GRW and Bohmian formulations and

quantum mechanics, in order to emphasize essentially two points: (i) the discussion on causality in quantum mechanics should be cast by using the conceptual resources allowed by ontologically unambiguous interpretations of quantum mechanics and not on the background of its ‘orthodox’ – hence vague – formulation; (ii) the interpretation-dependence of causal reasoning in quantum mechanics implies different approaches to causality in (the different versions of) GRW and Bohmian formulations.

Keywords

Quantum Mechanic Causal Model Light Cone Bohmian Mechanic Lorentz Frame 
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.

References

  1. Aharonov, Y. and Albert, D. (1980), States and observables in relativistic quantum field theories. Physical Review D, 3316–3324.Google Scholar
  2. Aharonov, Y. and Albert, D. (1981), Can we make sense out of the measurement process in relativistic quantum mechanics? Physical Review D 359–370.Google Scholar
  3. Aharonov, Y. and Albert, D. (1984), Is the usual notion of time evolution adequate for quantum-mechanical systems? II. Relativistic considerations, Physical Review D 228–234.Google Scholar
  4. Albert, D. (1992), Quantum Mechanics and Experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Allori, V., Goldstein, S., Tumulka, R., and Zanghì, N. (2006), On the common structure of Bohmian mechanics and the Ghirardi-Rimini-Weber theory, http://arxiv.org/quant-ph/0603027. Accessed Apr 2008.
  6. Bassi, A and Ghirardi, G. (2003), Dynamical reduction models, Physics Reports 379, 257–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bell, J. S. (1987), Are there quantum jumps? In C. W. Kilmister (ed.), Schrödinger. Centenary of a Polymath, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 41–52 (reprinted as chapter 22 of Bell 2004).Google Scholar
  8. Bell, J. S. (2004), Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2nd edition.Google Scholar
  9. Benatti, F., Ghirardi, G. and Grassi, R. (1995), Describing the macroscopic world: closing the circle within the dynamical reduction program, Foundations of Physics 25, 5–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Berkovitz, J. (2000a), The nature of causality in quantum mechanics, Theoria 15, 87–122.Google Scholar
  11. Berkovitz, J. (2000b), The many principles of the common cause, Reports on Philosophy 20, 51–83.Google Scholar
  12. Bloch, I. (1967), Some relativistic oddities in the quantum theory of observation, Physical Review 156, 1377–1384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dickson, M. (1996), Is the Bohm theory local? In J. Cushing, A. Fine and S. Goldstein (eds.), Bohmian Mechanics and Quantum Theory: An Appraisal Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 321–330.Google Scholar
  14. Dickson, M. (1998), Quantum Chance and Non-Locality, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,.Google Scholar
  15. Ducasse, C. J. (1926), On the nature and observability of the causal relation, Journal of Philosophy 23, 57–68 (reprinted in E. Sosa and M. Tooley (eds.), Causation, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1993, pp. 125–136, page references to the reprinted edition).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dürr, D., Goldstein, S., Münch-Berndl, K. and Zanghì, N. (1999), Hypersurface Bohm-Dirac models, Physical Review A 60, 2729–2736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Eberhard, P. (1978), Bell’s theorem and the different concepts of locality, Nuovo Cimento 46B, 392–419.Google Scholar
  18. Fleming, G. N. (1989), Lorentz invariant state reduction and localization, In A. Fine and J. Leplin (eds.), PSA1988 Vol. 2, E. Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 112–126.Google Scholar
  19. Fleming, G. N. (1996), Just how radical is hyperplane dependence? In R.K. Clifton (ed.), Perspectives on Quantum Reality, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 11–28.Google Scholar
  20. Ghirardi, G. C. (2000), Local measurements of nonlocal observables and the relativistic reduction process, Foundations of Physics 30, 1337–1385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ghirardi, G. C. (2007), Some reflections inspired by my research activity in quantum mechanics, Journal of Physics A 40, 2891–2917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ghirardi, G. C., Rimini, A. and Weber, T. (1980), A general argument against superluminal transmission through the quantum mechanical measurement process’, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento 27, 293–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ghirardi, G. C., Rimini, A. and Weber, T. (1986), Unified dynamics for microscopic and macroscopic systems, Physical Review D 34, 470–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hellwig, K. E. and Kraus, K. (1970), Formal description of measurements in local quantum field theory, Physical Review D1, 566–571.Google Scholar
  25. Hitchcock, C. (2007), How to be a causal pluralist, In P. Machamer and G. Wolters (eds.), Thinking About Causes: From Greek Philosophy to Modern Physics, Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 200–221.Google Scholar
  26. Maudlin, T. (1996), Space-time and the quantum world, In J. Cushing, A. Fine and S. Goldstein (eds.), Bohmian Mechanics and Quantum Theory: An Appraisal, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 285–307.Google Scholar
  27. Maudlin, T. (2000), Review of Dickson 1998, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 51, 875–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maudlin, T. (2002), Quantum Non-Locality and Relativity. Oxford:Blackwell (2nd edition).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Suarez, M. (2007), Causal inference in quantum mechanics: a reassessment, In F. Russo, and J. Williamson (eds.), Causality and Probability in the Sciences, London: College, pp. 65–106.Google Scholar
  30. Tumulka, R. (2006), A relativistic version of the Ghirardi-Rimini-Weber model, Journal of Statistical Physics 125, 821–840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tumulka, R. (2007), Two unromantic pictures of quantum theory, Journal of Physics A 40, 3245–3273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Williamson, J. (2007), Causality, In D. Gabbay, and F. Guenthner (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic, vol. 14, Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 89–120.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Netherlands 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Human SciencesUniversity of Milan-BicoccaMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations