BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

R. E. Kastner

R. E. Kastner appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
quant-phphysics.hist-phphysics.pop-phphysics.atom-phgr-qchep-thphysics.ed-ph

Catalog footprint

What is connected

21works
7topics
1close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

21 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Unitary-Only Quantum Theory Cannot Consistently Describe the Use of Itself: On the Frauchiger-Renner Paradox

The Frauchiger-Renner Paradox is an extension of paradoxes based on the 'Problem of Measurement,' such as Schrodinger's Cat and Wigner's Friend. All of these paradoxes stem from assuming that quantum theory has only unitary (linear) physical dynamics, and the attendant ambiguity about what counts as a 'measurement'--i.e., the inability to account for the observation of determinate measurement outcomes from within the theory itself. This paper discusses a basic inconsistency arising in the FR scenario at a much earlier point than the derived contradiction: namely, the inconsistency inherent in treating an improper mixture (reduced density operator) as a proper, epistemic mixture. This is an illegitimate procedure that is nevertheless endemic if quantum theory is assumed to be always unitary. In contrast, under a non-unitary account of quantum state reduction yielding determinate outcomes, the use of a proper mixture for measurement results becomes legitimate, and this entire class of paradoxes cannot be mounted. The conclusion is that the real lesson of the FR paradox is that it is the unitary-only assumption that needs to be critically reassessed.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Decoherence and the Transactional Interpretation

This paper presents an analysis of decoherence resulting from the physically real non-unitarity, or 'objective reduction,' that occurs in the Transactional Interpretation (TI). Two distinct aspects of the decoherence process are identified and disambiguated; specifically, (i) the resolution of the basic measurement interaction with respect to the observable under study, and (ii) the effect on the measured system of repetition of the measurement interaction. It is shown that the measurement interaction as described in TI leads naturally to the same quantitative expression for the decoherence function as in the standard unitary-only account. However, unlike in the unitary-only approach, under TI, the reduced density operator for the measured system can legitimately be interpreted as representing the occurrence of an actual measurement result.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Beyond Complementarity

It is argued that Niels Bohr ultimately arrived at positivistic and antirealist-flavored statements because of weaknesses in his initial objective of accounting for measurement in physical terms. Bohr's investigative approach faced a dilemma, the choices being (i) conceptual inconsistency or (ii) taking the classical realm as primitive. In either case, Bohr's `Complementarity' does not adequately explain or account for the emergence of a macroscopic, classical domain from a microscopic domain described by quantum mechanics. A diagnosis of the basic problem is offered, and an alternative way forward is indicated.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Bound States as Emergent Quantum Structures

Bound states arise in many interactions among elementary field states, and are represented by poles in the scattering matrix. The emergent nature of bound states suggests that they play a perhaps under-appreciated role in specifying the ontologically relevant degrees of freedom pertaining to composite systems. The basics of this ontology are presented, and it is discussed in light of an example of Arsenijevi\' c et al.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

The Illusory Appeal of Decoherence in the Everettian Picture: Affirming the Consequent

The idea that decoherence in a unitary-only quantum theory suffices to explain emergence of classical phenomena has been shown in the peer-reviewed literature to be seriously flawed due to circularity. However, claims continue to be made that this approach, also known as "Quantum Darwinism," is the correct way to understand classical emergence. This Letter reviews the basic problem and points out an additional logical flaw in the argument. It is concluded that the "Quantum Darwinism" program fails.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Haag's Theorem as a Reason to Reconsider Direct-Action Theories

It is argued that the severe consequences of Haag's inconsistency theorem for relativistic quantum field theories can be successfully evaded in the direct-action approach. Some recent favorable comments of John Wheeler, often mistakenly presumed to have abandoned his own (and Feynman's) direct-action theory, together with the remarkable immunity of direct-action quantum electrodynamics to Haag's theorem, suggest that it may well be a good time to rehabilitate direct action theories. It is also noted that, as extra dividends, direct-action QED is immune to the self-energy problem of standard gauge field QED, and can also provide a solution to the problem of gauge arbitrariness.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Maudlin's Challenge Refuted: A Reply to Lewis

Lewis has recently argued that Maudlin's contingent absorber experiment remains a significant problem for the Transactional Interpretation (TI). He argues that the only straightforward way to resolve the challenge is by describing the absorbers as offer waves, and asserts that this is a previously unnoticed aspect of the challenge for TI. This argument is refuted in two basic ways: (i) it is noted that the Maudlin experiment cannot be meaningfully recast with absorbers described by quantum states; instead the author replaces it with an ordinary which-way experiment; and (ii) the extant rebuttals to the Maudlin challenge in its original form are not in fact subject to the alleged flaws that Lewis ascribes to them. This paper further seeks to clarify the issues raised in Lewis' presentation concerning the distinction between quantum systems and macroscopic objects in TI. It is noted that the latest, possibilist version of TI (PTI) has no ambiguity concerning macroscopic absorbers. In particular, macroscopic objects are not subject to indeterminate trajectories, since they are continually undergoing collapse. It is concluded that the Maudlin challenge poses no significant problem for the transactional interpretation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

Better than "flashes": Transactions

I discuss Gisin's result showing that sets of quantum-correlated spacelike events cannot be described by a covariant probability distribution over hidden variables, and his conclusion that Tumulka's "rGRWf" (relativistic GRW "flash ontology" model) is an appropriate model to resolve the apparent conflict between quantum theory and relativity. The contrasts and similarities between the Transactional Interpretation's (TI) handling of a specific measurement result and that of GRW approaches are clarified. I argue that TI resolves the apparent conflict between quantum theory and relativity described by Gisin in a harmonious manner, without the necessity of modifying the theory.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

de Broglie waves as the "Bridge of Becoming" between quantum theory and relativity

It is hypothesized that de Broglie's 'matter waves' provide a dynamical basis for Minkowski spacetime in an antisubstantivalist or relational account. The relativity of simultaneity is seen as an effect of the de Broglie oscillation together with a basic relativity postulate, while the dispersion relation from finite rest mass gives rise to the differentiation of spatial and temporal axes. Thus spacetime is seen as not fundamental, but rather as emergent from the quantum level. A result by Solov'ev which demonstrates that time is not an applicable concept at the quantum level is adduced in support of this claim. Finally, it is noted that de Broglie waves can be seen as the "bridge of becoming" discussed by Elitzur and Dolev (2005).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

Quantum Nonlocality: Not Eliminated by the Heisenberg Picture

It is argued that the Heisenberg picture of standard quantum mechanics does not save Einstein locality as claimed in Deutsch and Hayden (2000). In particular, the EPR-type correlations that DH obtain by comparing two qubits in a local manner are shown to exist before that comparison. In view of this result, the local comparison argument would appear to ineffective in supporting their locality claim.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

Comment on "Comment on 'On Visibility in the Afshar Two-Slit Experiment' "

Tabish Qureshi (2010) has recently objected to an aspect of my discussion of a thought experiment by Srikanth (2001). I believe his objection is based on a misunderstanding about my presentation, but I accept responsibility for not being more clear. Here I attempt to clear up any confusion and to point out that one can indeed obtain interference in this experiment based on taking care to correctly characterize the detection process. I also emphasize that Qureshi and I are in full agreement concerning the assertion that when interference is present, there is no genuine 'which slit' information, and that in this case, the measurement necessary to preserve interference precludes determination of an actual slit of origin for the photon.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

The Hardy Experiment in the Transactional Interpretation

The Hardy experiment is analyzed from the standpoint of the Transactional Interpretation (TI) in its possibilist variant, PTI. It is argued that PTI provides a natural and illuminating account of the associated phenomena, resolving the apparent paradox which arises from the mistaken notion that components of the state vector labeled by spacetime regions imply the actual presence of a corpuscle in that region.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

The Quantum Liar Experiment in Cramer's Transactional Interpretation

Cramer's Transactional Interpretation (TI) is applied to the "Quantum Liar Experiment" (QLE). It is shown how some apparently paradoxical features can be explained naturally, albeit nonlocally (since TI is an explicitly nonlocal interpretation, at least from the vantage point of ordinary spacetime). At the same time, it is proposed that in order to preserve the elegance and economy of the interpretation, it may be necessary to consider offer and confirmation waves as propagating in a "higher space" of possibilities.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

Why Everettians Should Appreciate the Transactional Interpretation

The attractive feature of the Everett approach is its admirable spirit of approaching the quantum puzzle with a Zen-like "beginner's mind" in order to try to envision what the pure formalism might be saying about quantum reality, even if that journey leads to a strange place. It is argued that the transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics (TI), appropriately interpreted, shares the same motivation and achieves much more, with far fewer conceptual perplexities, by taking into account heretofore overlooked features of the quantum formalism itself (i.e. advanced states). In particular, TI does not need to talk about brain states, consciousness, or observers (rational or otherwise). In its possibilist variant ("PTI"), it shares the realist virtues of treating state vector branches as genuine dynamical entities, without having to explain how or why all of their associated outcomes actually happen (they don't), how to account for a plenitude of counterpart observers in some coherent notion of trans-temporal identity of the bifurcating observers (observers don't bifurcate in TI), nor how the certainty of all outcomes could be consistent with any coherent theory of probability, let alone the Born probability (the Born probability emerges naturally in TI). In short, TI is precisely the one-world interpretation Kent is looking for in his (2010).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2009arXiv

On Visibility in the Afshar Two-Slit Experiment

A modified version of Young's experiment by Shahriar Afshar indirectly reveals the presence of a fully articulated interference pattern prior to the post-selection of a particle in a "which-slit" basis. While this experiment does not constitute a violation of Bohr's Complementarity Principle as claimed by Afshar, both he and many of his critics incorrectly assume that a commonly used relationship between visibility parameter V and "which-way" parameter K has crucial relevance to his experiment. It is argued here that this relationship does not apply to this experimental situation and that it is wrong to make any use of it in support of claims for or against the bearing of this experiment on Complementarity.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2005arXiv

Why the Afshar Experiment Does Not Refute Complementarity

A modified version of Young's experiment by Shahriar Afshar demonstrates that, prior to what appears to be a ``which-way'' measurement, an interference pattern exists. Afshar has claimed that this result constitutes a violation of the Principle of Complementarity. This paper discusses the implications of this experiment and considers how Cramer's Transactional Interpretation easily accomodates the result. It is also shown that the Afshar experiment is analogous in key respects to a spin one-half particle prepared as ``spin up along $\bf x$'', subjected to a nondestructive confirmation of that preparation, and post-selected in a specific state of spin along $\bf z$. The terminology ``which-way'' or ``which-slit'' is critiqued; it is argued that this usage by both Afshar and his critics is misleading and has contributed to confusion surrounding the interpretation of the experiment. Nevertheless, it is concluded that Bohr would have had no more problem accounting for the Afshar result than he would in accounting for the aforementioned pre- and post-selection spin experiment, in which the particle's preparation state is confirmed by a nondestructive measurement prior to post-selection. In addition, some new inferences about the interpretation of delayed choice experiments are drawn from the analysis.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint1999arXiv

The Three-Box "Paradox" and Other Reasons to Reject the Counterfactual Usage of the ABL Rule

An apparent paradox proposed by Aharonov and Vaidman in which a single particle can be found with certainty in two (or more) boxes is analyzed by way of a simple thought experiment. It is found that the apparent paradox arises from an invalid counterfactual usage of the Aharonov-Bergmann-Lebowitz (ABL) rule, and effectively attributes conflicting properties not to the same particle but to different particles. A connection is made between the present analysis and the consistent histories formulation of Griffiths. Finally, a critique is given of some recent counterarguments by Vaidman against the rejection of the counterfactual usage of the ABL rule.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access