33
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The High-Energy Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

      Preprint

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          We address the issue of the interpretation of quantum mechanics by asking why the issue never arises in the description of high-energy interactions. We argue that several tenets of quantum mechanics, specifically the collapse of the wave function, follow directly once one accepts the essential randomness of fundamental interaction events. We then show that scale separation of fundamental interactions ensures that decoherent measurement can be unambiguously separated from the random quantum events. Finally, we argue that the fundamental symmetries of space and time guarantee the existence of a unique preferred basis. We argue that this set of ideas might lead to an interpretation of quantum mechanics, or rather, show in which sense an "interpretation" is (or is not) necessary.

          Related collections

          Most cited references2

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Quantum Mechanics with Extended Probabilities

          The quantum mechanics of closed systems such as the universe is formulated using an extension of familiar probability theory that incorporates negative probabilities. Probabilities must be positive for sets of alternative histories that are the basis of fair settleable bets. However, in quantum mechanics there are sets of alternative histories that can be described but which cannot be the basis for fair settleable bets. Members of such sets can be assigned extended probabilities that are sometimes negative. A prescription for extended probabilities is introduced that assigns extended probabilities to all histories that can be described, fine grained or coarse grained, members of decoherent sets or not. All probability sum rules are satisfied exactly. Sets of histories that are recorded to sufficient precision are the basis of settleable bets. This formulation is compared with the decoherent (consistent) histories formulation of quantum theory. Prospects are discussed for using this formulation to provide testable alternatives to quantum theory or further generalizations of it.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Quantum Theory of Neutrino Oscillations for Pedestrians - Simple Answers to Confusing Questions

            (2010)
            Why are different mass states coherent? What is the correct formula for the oscillation phase? How can textbook formulas for oscillations in time describe experiments which never measure time? How can we treat the different velocities and different transit times of different mass eigenstates and avoid incorrect factors of two? How can textbook forumulas which describe coherence between energy states be justified when Stodolsky's theorem states there is no coherence between different energies? Is covariant relativistic quantum field theory necessary to describe neutrino oscillations? How important is the detector, which is at rest in the laboratory and cannot be Lorentz tranformed to other frames? These questions are answered by a simple rigorous calculation which includes the quantum fluctuations in the position of the detector and in the transit time between source and detector. The commonly used standard formula for neutrino oscillation phases is confirmed. An "ideal" detector which measures precisely the energy and momentum of the neutrino destroys all phases in the initial wave packet and cannot observe oscillations. A realistic detector preserves the phase differences between neutrinos having the same energy and different momenta and confirms the standard formula. Whether phase differences between neutrinos with different energies are observable or destroyed by the detector is irrelevant.
              Bookmark

              Author and article information

              Journal
              08 September 2013
              2013-10-01
              Article
              1309.1996
              ab314589-60c5-4b6d-9bb8-16c856f7682d

              http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/

              History
              Custom metadata
              Euresis Journal, Vol. 6, Autumn 2013
              13 pages, no figures; two typos corrected
              physics.hist-ph hep-ph hep-th quant-ph

              Quantum physics & Field theory,History of physics,High energy & Particle physics

              Comments

              Comment on this article