Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Casey Blood

Publications and source records attributed to Casey Blood.

17 recordsLinked to original sources
arXiv2015

Classical perception follows solely from the linearity of quantum mechanics with no need for decoherence or the environment

As illustrated by Schrodingers cat, there are often several macroscopically different versions of reality simultaneously existing in the wave function. On the face of it, this would seem to imply that an observer could perceive a superposition of versions and thereby put quantum mechanics at odds with our perceptions. However one can show, without invoking decoherence or the environment, that the linearity of quantum mechanics implies we will perceive only a single, classical version of reality. Linearity also implies our perceptions will have a particle-like consistency.

quant-ph↗
arXiv2015

A problem with the Pusey, Barrett, Rudolph analysis of the reality of the quantum state

The analysis of Pusey, Barrett and Rudolph aims to show there can be no objective physical reality which underlies, and is more general than, the state vector. But there appears to be a gap in their reasoning. To show their result, they use entangled states of independent systems. However, no specific experimental arrangement to detect these entangled states has been proposed. Thus their argument as it stands does not fully show there is a detectable conflict between the predictions of quantum mechanics and the existence of an underlying reality. And it is not clear that one can devise the necessary measuring device.

quant-ph↗
arXiv2013

What do kets represent?

It is usually assumed that a ket represents the state of an actually existing particle. But one can show there is no evidence for particles. The particle-like properties of mass, spin and charge, as well as particle-like trajectories, the photoelectric effect, and localized effects from spread-out wave functions can be explained using quantum mechanics alone. It is therefore proposed instead that kets represent particle-like solutions to a pre-representational linear partial differential equation which has Poincaré and internal symmetries. This equation underlies the completely representational character, including mass, spin, charge, internal symmetries, and symmetric and antisymmetric statistics, of current quantum mechanics.

quant-ph↗
arXiv2013

Solution to the measurement problem within linear, unitary, no collapse, no particle quantum mechanics

The measurement problem is to explain why a system which is in a linear combination of states appears, upon measurement, to be in just one of those states. The solution given here is to first show that if one assumes linear, unitary, no collapse, no particle quantum mechanics, the different versions of reality are completely isolated from each other. This then implies only the eigenstates appropriate to the measurement setup will be perceived. In a Stern-Gerlach experiment, for example, only spin up or spin down will be perceived, but never a combination of the two.

quant-ph↗
arXiv2012

A linear theory underlying quantum mechanics

Linearity allows several versions of reality to simultaneously exist in the state vector. But it implies that there is no interaction between versions, and that there will never be perception of more than one version. It also implies, in conjunction with group representation theory, that the particle-like properties of mass, energy, momentum, spin and charge are attributes of the state vectors. These results can be used to show there is no evidence for the objective existence of particles. The properties of the wave function are sufficient to explain all the particle-like properties of matter. Representation theory is also extensively employed in the Standard Model, with gauge fields transforming as representations of the internal symmetry group. And when applied to the permutation group, it is essential for understanding symmetric and antisymmetric states. In fact all of quantum mechanics is set up exactly as if it were the representation of an underlying pre-representational theory. A linear equation structure for the underlying theory is suggested, and it is shown in outline how quantum field theory emerges as a representational form of the pre-representational theory.

quant-ph↗
arXiv2011

Derivation of the probability law in the many-worlds, one-MIND interpretation

The basic mathematical structure, QM-A, of the many worlds interpretation consists solely of the linear mathematics plus the Hilbert space properties of the state vectors. There is no collapse and there are no particles or hidden variables. It is remarkable that QM-A alone can account for all our observations except probability. There is no need for particles, hidden variables or collapse to explain perception of only one classical version of reality, the photoelectric effect, localized effects from a spread-out wave function in scattering and interference experiments, wave-particle duality, and so on. But probability cannot be defined within QM-A. Nevertheless, because of its astonishing success, it seems reasonable to require (1) that the mathematics of an interpretation be limited to the highly successful QM-A and (2) that "matter" be composed of state vectors alone. But the probability law requires, in essence, that one version of the observer be singled out. The most straightforward way to accomplish this under (1) and (2) is to assume there is an aspect of the observer-the Mind-which is outside the laws of quantum mechanics and perceives just one version of reality. Under that assumption, the probability law can then be derived. Thus we have an interpretation, QM-A plus "outside" observer, which explains all our perceptions.

quant-ph↗
arXiv2011

No Evidence for Particles

There are a number of experiments and observations that appear to argue for the existence of particles, including the photoelectric and Compton effects, exposure of only one film grain by a spread-out photon wave function, and particle-like trajectories in bubble chambers. It can be shown, however, that all the particle-like phenomena can be explained by using properties of the wave functions/state vectors alone. Thus there is no evidence for particles. Wave-particle duality arises because the wave functions alone have both wave-like and particle-like properties. Further the results of the Bell-Aspect experiment and other experiments on entangled systems, which seem to imply peculiar properties for particles if they exist, are easily and naturally understood if reality consists of the state vectors alone. The linear equation-Hilbert space structure for the state vectors, by itself, can explain every mystery in quantum mechanics except the origin of the probability law.

quant-ph↗
arXiv2010

The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is Fatally Flawed

The linear mathematics of quantum mechanics gives many versions of reality instead of the single version we perceive, with the perceived version chosen at random according to a probability law. Because of these peculiarities, the theory requires an interpretation to be fully understood. Over 50 years ago, Everett proposed in his many-worlds interpretation that these characteristics could be accounted for if the mathematics itself, with no collapse or hidden variables, was carefully analyzed. We show this is incorrect; the linear mathematics cannot account for the probability law. Thus the many-worlds interpretation is not viable. Some mechanism, such as collapse or hidden variables, must be added to obtain a satisfactory understanding of the physical universe.

quant-ph↗
arXiv2010

Derivation of Bell's locality condition from the relativity of simultaneity

One way to deal with the fact that many versions of reality simultanenously exist in the wave function is to suppose there are hidden variables that single out one version for perception. Bell showed theoretically and the Aspect experiment confirmed that there could be no hidden variable theory which satisfied a locality condition. We show here that the locality condition can be derived from the well-established principle of the relativity of simultaneity. Thus virtually all hidden variable theories, not just obviously local ones, are in conflict with the results of the Aspect experiment and are therefore forbidden.

quant-ph↗
arXiv2010

A primer on quantum mechanics and its interpretations

All the concepts and principles necessary to understand quantum mechanics on an initial level are given in a form suitable for the non-expert. The concepts explained include visualizing the wave function, wave-particle duality, the implications of Schrodinger's cat, probability, the uncertainty principle, collapse of the wave function, and others. However, because of the peculiar, non-intuitive nature of quantum mechanics, one must understand the potential interpretations of its mathematics before one can properly understand these concepts. Thus the paper is organized aorund interpretations, conceptual pictures that explain the peculiar properties of the theory. The only interpretation that currently satisfies all the constraints imposed by experiments and the theory itself makes use of a perceiving Mind which is outside the laws of quantum mechanics.

quant-ph↗
arXiv2009

Constraints on Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics

A succinct statement and justification of all the principles necessary to understand and evaluate interpretations of quantum mechanics is given. These principles provide strong constraints on interpretations. They imply the particle-like properties of mass, energy, momentum, spin, charge, and locality are actually properties of the wave function, and this in turn implies there is no evidence for the existence of particles. In addition, there is currently no experimental evidence for collapse, and a theory of collapse encounters significant hurdles. Further, the probability law is found to rule out the many-worlds interpretation, so all three major interpretations encounter serious to fatal problems. An interpretation which conforms to all the principles is given.

physics.gen-ph↗
arXiv2009

General principles in the interpretation of quantum mechanics

The three major theoretical principles of quantum mechanics relevant to its interpretation are: (T1), linearity; (T2), invariance under certain groups; and (T3) the orthogonality and isolation of the different branches of the state vector. These three imply the particle-like properties of mass, energy, momentum, spin, charge, and locality are actually properties of the state vector; and this in turn implies there is no evidence for the existence of particles. Experimentally there is no evidence for collapse (E1) and theoretically linearity prohibits collapse. One also has the experimentally verified probability law (E2), which is found to rule out the many-worlds interpretation. The failure of these three major interpretation, particles, collapse, and many-worlds, apparently implies an acceptable interpretation must be based on perception. Rather than being a separate principle, probability follows in this interpretation from a weak assumption on perception plus the combinatorics when an experiment is run many times. This suggests a relatively simple experimental test of the perception interpretation.

quant-ph↗
arXiv2009

Problems with Probability in Everett's Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

In the many-worlds interpretations (MWIs) of Everett and others, if I am the observer, there are several versions of me but no version is singled out as the one corresponding to my perceptions. However, it can be shown that the probability law implies one version must be singled out. Thus MWIs do not provide a sufficient basis for probability. If we are to have an acceptable description of the physical universe, MWIs must be supplemented by some mechanism, such as hidden variables or collapse, that singles out one version of the observer as the perceiving version.

quant-ph↗
arXiv2009

Group Representational Clues to a Theory Underlying Quantum Mechanics

The current form of quantum mechanics is very successful and is almost certainly correct. It is remarkable, however, that the entire structure-from the mass, spin and charge labels on particlelike states to antisymmetry to broken internal symmetries to gauge transformations to the equations of motion-is built upon concepts from group representation theory. That is, the theory is constructed exactly as if it were a representational form of an underlying theory. Our proposed form for the underlying theory is that it is based on a linear equation, OF(V)=0. F is a function of some set of independent, currently unknown variables V, with O being a linear, partial differential operator in those variables. The operator is assumed to be invariant under a group of transformations of the Vs, homomorphic to the direct product of the inhomogeneous Lorentz group and the internal symmetry group. In such a theory, a state vector, denoted by a ket with group-theoretic labels, would represent a function of the independent variables. In addition to explaining the group representational structure of quantum mechanics, an underlying theory offers insight into gauge theory.

quant-ph↗
arXiv2008

Difficulties with Collapse Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics

Quantum mechanics gives many versions of reality but we perceive only one. One potential explanation for this, the one considered here, is that the wave function collapses down to just one version. The experimental situation is briefly reviewed, with no evidence found for collapse. The theoretical position is also reviewed and found wanting. Collapse-by-observation schemes are logically untenable. A mathematical theory of collapse must be nonlinear, a significant departure from current quantum theory. In addition, the primary candidate theory, the GRW-Pearle model, requires instantaneous, non-local transmission of information. It also requires transmission of information across versions of reality, which is forbidden in current quantum mechanics. And there is no apparent physical quantity, such as particle number, that can provide the mechanism for collapse in all cases. Further, these aspects, which are in disagreement with current theory, seem to be necessary for any mathematical theory of collapse. The conclusion is that the outlook for mathematical collapse schemes is not encouraging.

quant-ph↗