Parameter dependence in dynamical models for statevector reduction

We apply the distinction between parameter independence and outcome independence to the linear and nonlinear models of a recent nonrelativistic theory of continuous statevector reduction. We show that in the nonlinear model there is a set of realizations of the stochastic process that drives the statevector reduction for which parameter independence is violated for parallel spin components in the EPR-Bohm setup. Such a set has an appreciable probability of occurrence (≈ 1/2). On the other hand, the linear model exhibits only extremely small parameter dependence effects. The final section discusses the difficulties of finding a relativistic generalization of a parameter-dependent nonrelativistic theory. We identify this difficulty precisely and show how the weak parameter dependence of the linear model avoids it, provided one uses an appropriate criterion for the existence of definite outcomes.

[1]  Abner Shimony,et al.  Search for a naturalistic world view: An exchange on local beables , 1985 .

[2]  GianCarlo Ghirardi,et al.  Relativistic dynamical reduction models: General framework and examples , 1990 .

[3]  I. Bloch,et al.  Some Relativistic Oddities in the Quantum Theory of Observation , 1967 .

[4]  Pearle,et al.  Combining stochastic dynamical state-vector reduction with spontaneous localization. , 1989, Physical review. A, General physics.

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

[6]  D. Bohm A SUGGESTED INTERPRETATION OF THE QUANTUM THEORY IN TERMS OF "HIDDEN" VARIABLES. II , 1952 .

[7]  J. Bell,et al.  Speakable and Unspeakable in Quatum Mechanics , 1988 .

[8]  Old and New Ideas in the Theory of Quantum Measurement , 1990 .

[9]  G. Ghirardi,et al.  Parameter dependence and outcome dependence in dynamical models for state vector reduction , 1993 .

[10]  J. Bell,et al.  Schrödinger: Are there quantum jumps? , 1987 .

[11]  G. Ghirardi,et al.  A general argument against superluminal transmission through the quantum mechanical measurement process , 1980 .

[12]  Patrick Suppes,et al.  On the Determinism of Hidden Variable Theories with Strict Correlation and Conditional Statistical Independence of Observables , 1976 .

[13]  Yakir Aharonov,et al.  States and observables in relativistic quantum field theories , 1980 .

[14]  G. Ghirardi,et al.  Quantum mechanics with spontaneous localization and the quantum theory of measurement , 1986 .

[15]  James E. Jarrett,et al.  On the Physical Significance of the Locality Conditions in the Bell Arguments , 1984 .

[16]  K. Kraus,et al.  FORMAL DESCRIPTION OF MEASUREMENTS IN LOCAL QUANTUM FIELD THEORY. , 1970 .

[17]  The quantum potential and signalling in the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment , 1988 .

[18]  P. Pearle,et al.  Toward a Relativistic Theory of Statevector Reduction , 1990 .

[19]  J. Butterfield Bell's Theorem: What it Takes , 1992, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[20]  Pearle,et al.  Markov processes in Hilbert space and continuous spontaneous localization of systems of identical particles. , 1990, Physical review. A, Atomic, molecular, and optical physics.

[21]  GianCarlo Ghirardi,et al.  Experiments of the EPR Type Involving CP-Violation Do not Allow Faster-than-Light Communication between Distant Observers , 1988 .

[22]  P. H. Eberhard,et al.  Bell’s theorem and the different concepts of locality , 1978 .