Quantum measurements as weighted symmetry breaking processes: the hidden measurement perspective

The purpose of the present note is twofold. Firstly, we highlight the similarities between the ontologies of Kastner's possibilist transactional interpretation (PTI) of quantum mechanics - an extension of Cramer's transactional interpretation - and the authors' hidden-measurement interpretation (HMI). Secondly, we observe that although a weighted symmetry breaking (WSB) process was proposed in the PTI, to explain the actualization of incipient transactions, no specific mechanism was actually provided to explain why the weights of such symmetry breaking are precisely those given by the Born rule. In other terms, PTI, similarly to decoherence theory, doesn't explain a quantum measurement in a complete way, but just the transition from a pure state to a fully reduced density matrix state. On the other hand, the recently derived extended Bloch representation (EBR) - a specific implementation the HMI - precisely provides such missing piece of explanation, i.e., a qualitative description of the WSB as a process of actualization of hidden measurement-interactions and, more importantly, a quantitative prediction of the values of the associated weights that is compatible with the Born rule of probabilistic assignment. Therefore, from the PTI viewpoint, the EBR provide the missing link for a complete description of a quantum measurement. However, EBR is in a sense more general than PTI, as it does not rely on the specific notion of transaction, and therefore remains compatible with other physical mechanisms that could be at the origin of the measurement-interactions.

[1]  Weber,et al.  Unified dynamics for microscopic and macroscopic systems. , 1986, Physical review. D, Particles and fields.

[2]  Ruth E. Kastner,et al.  The Transactional Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics , 2012 .

[3]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Solving the hard problem of Bertrand's paradox , 2014, 1403.4139.

[4]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Do spins have directions? , 2015, Soft Comput..

[5]  J. Berkovitz On predictions in retro-causal interpretations of quantum mechanics , 2008 .

[6]  The Possibilist Transactional Interpretation and Relativity , 2012, 1204.5227.

[7]  J. Berkovitz On Causal Loops in the Quantum Realm , 2002 .

[8]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The extended Bloch representation of quantum mechanics and the hidden-measurement solution to the measurement problem , 2014, 1404.2429.

[9]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The entity and modern physics: the creation-discovery- view of reality 1 , 1998 .

[10]  J. Cramer,et al.  The transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics , 1986 .

[11]  G. Ghirardi,et al.  A model for a unified quantum description of macroscopic and microscopic systems , 1985 .

[12]  R. Kastner The Transactional Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics: The Reality of Possibility , 2012 .

[13]  Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi,et al.  Ephemeral Properties and the Illusion of Microscopic Particles , 2010, 1008.2450.

[14]  Dirk Aerts,et al.  A possible explanation for the probabilities of quantum mechanics , 1986 .

[15]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Many-Measurements or Many-Worlds? A Dialogue , 2014, 1406.0620.

[16]  The Quantum Handshake: Entanglement, Nonlocality and Transactions , 2015 .

[17]  Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi,et al.  The δ-Quantum Machine, the k-Model, and the Non-ordinary Spatiality of Quantum Entities , 2011, 1104.4738.

[18]  M. Schlosshauer Decoherence, the measurement problem, and interpretations of quantum mechanics , 2003, quant-ph/0312059.

[19]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  AN ATTEMPT TO IMAGINE PARTS OF THE REALITY OF THE MICRO-WORLD , 1990 .

[20]  R. Schack,et al.  Quantum probability from decision theory? , 1999, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[21]  T. Maudlin Quantum non-locality and relativity : metaphysical intimations of modern physics , 1996 .

[22]  R. Kastner The Quantum Liar Experiment in Cramer's Transactional Interpretation , 2009, 0906.1626.

[23]  David John Baker,et al.  Measurement outcomes and probability in Everettian quantum mechanics , 2007 .

[24]  Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi,et al.  From Permanence to Total Availability: A Quantum Conceptual Upgrade , 2010, 1010.4942.

[25]  Diederik Aerts The stuff the world is made of: physics and reality , 1999 .

[26]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The GTR-model: a universal framework for quantum-like measurements , 2015, ArXiv.

[27]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The unreasonable success of quantum probability II: Quantum measurements as universal measurements , 2014, Journal of Mathematical Psychology.