Sixty-Two Years of Uncertainty pp 193-214 | Cite as

# Toward a Relativistic Theory of Statevector Reduction

Chapter

## Abstract

“For each measurement, one is required to ascribe to the ψ-function a quite sudden change… The abrupt change by measurement… is the most interesting point of the entire theory.… For *this* reason one can *not* put the ψ-function directly in place of the physical thing… because from the realism point of view observation is a natural process like any other and cannot *per se* bring about an interruption of the orderly flow of events.”

## Keywords

Inertial Frame Reduction Theory Probability Rule Meson Field Reduction Dynamic
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.

## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References and Remarks

- 1a.E. Schrodinger, Die Naturwissenschaften
**23**, 807 (1935).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 1a.E. Schrodinger, Die Naturwissenschaften
**23**, 823 (1935).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 1a.E. Schrodinger, Die Naturwissenschaften
**23**, 844 (1935).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 2.D. Bohm and J. Bub, Reviews of Modern Physics
**38**, 453 (1966).MathSciNetADSMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 3.P. Pearle, Physical Review D
**13**, 857 (1976).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 4.P. Pearle, International Journal of Theoretical Physics
**48**, 489 (1979).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 5.F. Karolyhazy, II Nuovo Cimento
**52**, 390 (1966) and in this volume;ADSGoogle Scholar - F. Karolyhazy, A. Frenkel and B. Lukacz, in
*Physics as Natural Philosophy*, edited by A. Shimony and H Feshbach (M.I.T. Press, Cambridge Mass., 1982) and in*Quantum Concepts in Space and Time*, edited by R. Penrose and C. J. Isham (Clarendon, Oxford, 1986).Google Scholar - 6.R. Penrose in
*Quantum Concepts in Space and Time*, edited by R. Penrose and C. J. Isham (Clarendon, Oxford, 1986).Google Scholar - 7a.L. Diosi, Physics Letters A
**120**, 377 (1987)MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 7b.L. Diosi, Physical Review A
**40**, 1165 (1989).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 8.P. Pearle, Physical Review A
**39**, 2277 (1989).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 9.P. Pearle and J. Soucek, Foundations of Physics Letters
**2**, 287 (1989).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 10.G. C. Ghirardi, P. Pearle and A. Rimini, Trieste preprint IC/89/44.Google Scholar
- 11.G. C. Ghirardi and A. Rimini, in this volume.Google Scholar
- 12a.G. C. Ghirardi, A. Rimini and T. Weber, Physical Review D
**34**, 470 (1986)MathSciNetADSMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 12b.G. C. Ghirardi, A. Rimini and T. Weber, Foundations of Physics
**18**, 1, (1988).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 13.J. S. Bell in
*Schrodinger-Centenary celebration of a polymath*, edited by C. W. Kilmister (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1987).Google Scholar - 14.J. S. Bell, Physics
**1**, 195 (1965).Google Scholar - 15.J. S. Bell in
*The Ghost In The Atom*, edited by P.C.W. Davies and J.R. Brown (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1986).Google Scholar - 16.L Diosi, Journal of Physics A
**21**, 2885 (1988).MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 17.N. Gisin, Physical Review Letters
**52**, 1657 (1984).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 18.P. Pearle in
*Quantum Concepts in Space and Time*, edited by R. Penrose and C. J. Isham (Clarendon, Oxford, 1986).Google Scholar - 19.P. Pearle, Physical Review D
**29**, 235 (1984).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 20a.A. Zeilinger, R. Gaehler, C. G. Shull and W. Treimer in
*Symposium on Neutron Scattering*, edited by J. Faber Jr. (Amer. Inst, of Phys., 1984)Google Scholar - 20a.A. Zeilinger in
*Quantum Concepts in Space and Time*, edited by R. Penrose and C. J. Isham (Clarendon, Oxford, 1986).Google Scholar - 21.P. Pearle in
*New Techniques in Quantum Measurement theory*, edited by D. M. Greenberger (N.Y. Acad. of Sci., N.Y., 1986). This was first brought to my attention by Y. Anaronov.Google Scholar - 22.N. Gisin, Physical Review Letters
**53**, 1776 (1984).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 23.P. Pearle, Physical Review Letters
**53**, 1775 (1984).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 24.N. Gisin, Helvetica Physica Acta,
**62**, 363 (1989).MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 25.G. Lindblad, Communications in Mathematical Physics
**48**, 119 (1976).MathSciNetADSMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 26.P. Pearle, Physical Review D
**33**, 2240 (1986).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 27.P. Pearle, Foundations of Physics
**12**, 249 (1982).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 28.Eq. (3.1) is a Stratonovich stochastic differential equation, which means for our purposes that the white noise and brownian motion can be manipulated as if they were ordinary functions.Google Scholar
- 29.Eq. (3.22) is only meant to be suggestive, as B(z,t) is not an integrable function. The condition is better expressed as an inequality for the functional integral ∫
_{R}DBexp-∫dz[B(z,t)-2λtf(a_{n}-z)]^{2}/(2λt) > ∫_{R}DBexp-c^{2}, where the subscript R denotes that the functional integral is restricted to a suitable range of B(z,t).Google Scholar - 30.P. Pearle, Journal of Statistical Physics 41, 719 (1985), and in references 23, 26, 21, and even as recentlv as reference 8. My conversion is due to discussions at Erice with Bell, Ghirardi, uisin and Shimony, which made me realize that a realist can cheerfully survive with tails in his world picture, and a recent discussion with Penrose which helped me realize that tails are not only tolerable, but they are a necessity for boost invariance.MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 31.The nonlocal form V(a,t,v)=Σ
_{n}∫ ∫dx’dxg_{n}[φ(x),φ(x’)]G_{n}(x,x’,a,t,v), L(a,t,v)=Σ_{n}∫ ∫dx’dxh_{n}[φ(x),φ(x’)]H_{n}(x,x’,a,t,v) is found not to satisfy the constraint (5.7c) unless G_{n}ana H_{n}are proportional to δ(x-x’), i.e. unless the form is local.Google Scholar - 32.S. Tomonaga, Progress in Thoretical Physics
**1**, 27 (1946). Eq. (5.13) contains no term describing the usual interaction of the quantum field theory because it is presumed that φ_{int}(x,t) is the solution of that theory. If one wishes, the usual term can be added and φ_{int}(x,t) taken to describe the free field.MathSciNetADSMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 33.S. Schweber,
*An Introduction to Relativistic Quantum Field Theory*(Row Peterson, Illinois, 1961).Google Scholar - 34.G. C. Ghirardi, R. Grassi and P. Pearle, in preparation.Google Scholar
- 35.I would like to thank Roger Penrose for urging these considerations.Google Scholar
- 36a.Y. Aharanov and D. Albert, Physical Review D
**21**, 3316 (1980)MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 36b.Y. Aharanov and D. Albert, Physical Review D
**24**, 359 (1981) emphasize this point. However, these authors considered ordinary relativistic quantum theory, with an instantaneous reduction, and concluded that the notion of a statevector itself had to be abandoned, for it is incompatible with the additional requirements of relativity and probability conservation. Because the norm of the statevector is not constrained to be 1 in the CSL theory, there is no conflict, and no need to get rid of the notion of statevector.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

## Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1990