Many Worlds Model resolving the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox via a Direct Realism to Modal Realism Transition that preserves Einstein Locality
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The violation of Bell inequalities by quantum physical experiments disproves all relativistic micro causal, classically real models, short Local Realistic Models (LRM). Non-locality, the infamous “spooky interaction at a distance” (A. Einstein), is already sufficiently ‘unreal’ to motivate modifying the “realistic” in “local realistic”. This has led to many worlds and finally many minds interpretations. We introduce a simple many world model that resolves the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox. The model starts out as a classical LRM, thus clarifying that the many worlds concept alone does not imply quantum physics. Some of the desired ‘non-locality’, e.g. anti-correlation at equal measurement angles, is already present, but Bell’s inequality can of course not be violated. A single and natural step turns this LRM into a quantum model predicting the correct probabilities. Intriguingly, the crucial step does obviously not modify locality but instead reality: What before could have still been a direct realism turns into modal realism. This supports the trend away from the focus on non-locality in quantum mechanics towards a mature structural realism that preserves micro causality.
|Keywords||20 pages 2 figures|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Peter Kosso (2000). Quantum Mechanics and Realism. Foundations of Science 5 (1):47-60.
G. Giuseppe, F. Martini & D. Boschi (1996). Test of the Violation of Local Realism in Quantum Mechanics with No Use of Bell's Inequalities. Erkenntnis 45 (2-3):367 - 377.
S. V. Bhave (1986). Separable Hidden Variables Theory to Explain Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 37 (4):467-475.
David H. Sharp (1961). The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox Re-Examined. Philosophy of Science 28 (3):225-233.
László E. Szabó, The Einstein--Podolsky--Rosen Argument and the Bell Inequalities. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
C. A. Hooker (1971). Sharp and the Refutation of the Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen Paradox. Philosophy of Science 38 (2):224-233.
Manfred Stöckler (1986). Philosophen in der Mikrowelt — Ratlos? Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 17 (1):68-95.
N. D. Mermin (1983). Pair Distributions and Conditional Independence: Some Hints About the Structure of Strange Quantum Correlations. Philosophy of Science 50 (3):359-373.
Arthur Fine (1996). The Shaky Game: Einstein, Realism, and the Quantum Theory. University of Chicago Press.
Robert Clifton, Constantine Pagonis & Itamar Pitowsky (1992). Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and EPR. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:114 - 128.
W. Michael Dickson (1996). Determinism and Locality in Quantum Systems. Synthese 107 (1):55 - 82.
Added to index2011-08-13
Total downloads212 ( #4,344 of 1,699,704 )
Recent downloads (6 months)9 ( #69,042 of 1,699,704 )
How can I increase my downloads?