Is a time symmetric interpretation of quantum theory possible without retrocausality?

Huw Price has proposed an argument that suggests a time symmetric ontology for quantum theory must necessarily be retrocausal, i.e. it must involve influences that travel backwards in time. One of Price's assumptions is that the quantum state is a state of reality. However, one of the reasons for exploring retrocausality is that it offers the potential for evading the consequences of no-go theorems, including recent proofs of the reality of the quantum state. Here, we show that this assumption can be replaced by a different assumption, called λ-mediation, that plausibly holds independently of the status of the quantum state. We also reformulate the other assumptions behind the argument to place them in a more general framework and pin down the notion of time symmetry involved more precisely. We show that our assumptions imply a timelike analogue of Bell's local causality criterion and, in doing so, give a new interpretation of timelike violations of Bell inequalities. Namely, they show the impossibility of a (non-retrocausal) time symmetric ontology.

[1]  A. Jamiołkowski Linear transformations which preserve trace and positive semidefiniteness of operators , 1972 .

[2]  J. Lebowitz,et al.  TIME SYMMETRY IN THE QUANTUM PROCESS OF MEASUREMENT , 1964 .

[3]  Jeffrey A. Barrett,et al.  Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics , 2009, Compendium of Quantum Physics.

[4]  T. Fritz Quantum correlations in the temporal Clauser–Horne–Shimony–Holt (CHSH) scenario , 2010 .

[5]  Ronald A. Howard,et al.  Influence Diagrams , 2005, Decis. Anal..

[6]  Joint reality and Bell inequalities for consecutive measurements , 2006, quant-ph/0609099.

[7]  T. Moroder,et al.  Bounding temporal quantum correlations. , 2013, Physical review letters.

[8]  T. Fritz Quantum correlations in the temporal CHSH scenario , 2010, 1005.3421.

[9]  Marek Żukowski,et al.  Temporal inequalities for sequential multi-time actions in quantum information processing , 2014 .

[10]  R. Stephenson A and V , 1962, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[11]  Y. Aharonov,et al.  The Two-State Vector Formalism of Qauntum Mechanics: an Updated Review , 2001, quant-ph/0105101.

[12]  Stephen M. Barnett,et al.  Bayes' theorem and quantum retrodiction , 2000, quant-ph/0106139.

[13]  Lucien Hardy,et al.  ARE QUANTUM STATES REAL , 2012, 1205.1439.

[14]  D. Avis,et al.  Leggett-Garg inequalities and the geometry of the cut polytope , 2010, 1004.3818.

[15]  Garg,et al.  Quantum mechanics versus macroscopic realism: Is the flux there when nobody looks? , 1985, Physical review letters.

[16]  R. Spekkens Evidence for the epistemic view of quantum states: A toy theory , 2004, quant-ph/0401052.

[17]  Roger Colbeck,et al.  A system’s wave function is uniquely determined by its underlying physical state , 2013, 1312.7353.

[18]  T. Paterek,et al.  Nonclassicality of Temporal Correlations. , 2015, Physical review letters.

[19]  Raymond Lal,et al.  No ψ-epistemic model can fully explain the indistinguishability of quantum states. , 2013, Physical review letters.

[20]  C. Ross Found , 1869, The Dental register.

[21]  H. Price Does time-symmetry imply retrocausality? How the quantum world says “Maybe”? , 2010, 1002.0906.

[22]  H. Everett "Relative State" Formulation of Quantum Mechanics , 1957 .

[23]  T. Paterek,et al.  Unified approach to contextuality, nonlocality, and temporal correlations , 2013, 1302.3502.

[24]  M. Leifer,et al.  Maximally epistemic interpretations of the quantum state and contextuality. , 2012, Physical review letters.

[25]  D. Wallace The Emergent Multiverse: Quantum Theory according to the Everett Interpretation , 2012 .

[26]  B. Rosner,et al.  PROPOSED EXPERIMENT TO TEST LOCAL HIDDEN-VARIABLE THEORIES. , 1971 .

[27]  R. Spekkens Contextuality for preparations, transformations, and unsharp measurements , 2004, quant-ph/0406166.

[28]  Ravi Kunjwal,et al.  An experimental test of noncontextuality without unphysical idealizations , 2015, Nature Communications.

[29]  Remigiusz Augusiak,et al.  Local hidden–variable models for entangled quantum states , 2014, 1405.7321.

[30]  Jan Hilgevoord,et al.  Time in quantum mechanics , 2002 .

[31]  Č. Brukner,et al.  Entanglement in Time and Temporal Communication Complexity , 2004 .

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

[33]  R. Spekkens,et al.  Preparation contextuality powers parity-oblivious multiplexing. , 2008, Physical review letters.

[34]  Shane Mansfield,et al.  Reality of the quantum state: Towards a stronger ψ-ontology theorem , 2014, 1412.0669.

[35]  C. J. Wood,et al.  The lesson of causal discovery algorithms for quantum correlations: causal explanations of Bell-inequality violations require fine-tuning , 2012, 1208.4119.

[36]  S. Wehner,et al.  Bell Nonlocality , 2013, 1303.2849.

[37]  Alberto Montina Communication complexity and the reality of the wave-function , 2014, ArXiv.

[38]  Renato Renner,et al.  Is a system's wave function in one-to-one correspondence with its elements of reality? , 2011, Physical review letters.

[39]  Nicolas Gisin,et al.  Quantum communication , 2017, 2017 Optical Fiber Communications Conference and Exhibition (OFC).

[40]  Roderich Tumulka,et al.  What Is Bohmian Mechanics , 2001, Compendium of Quantum Physics.

[41]  Robert W. Spekkens,et al.  Einstein, Incompleteness, and the Epistemic View of Quantum States , 2007, 0706.2661.

[42]  M. S. Leifer,et al.  Is the Quantum State Real? An Extended Review of -ontology Theorems , 2014, 1409.1570.

[43]  Abner Shimony,et al.  Contextual Hidden Variables Theories and Bell's Inequalities , 1984, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[44]  Bryce S. DeWitt,et al.  The Many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics , 2015 .

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

[46]  Adam Bouland,et al.  ψ-epistemic theories: The role of symmetry , 2013, 1303.2834.

[47]  Č. Brukner,et al.  Quantum Entanglement in Time , 2004, quant-ph/0402127.

[48]  Stephen M. Barnett,et al.  Quantum retrodiction in open systems , 2002 .

[49]  Roger Colbeck,et al.  The Completeness of Quantum Theory for Predicting Measurement Outcomes , 2016 .

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

[51]  Shane Mansfield,et al.  Reality of the Quantum State: A Stronger Psi-ontology Theorem , 2014 .

[52]  C. Allen,et al.  Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy , 2011 .

[53]  Matthew F Pusey,et al.  On the reality of the quantum state , 2011, Nature Physics.

[54]  Guido Bacciagaluppi,et al.  Quantum Theory at the Crossroads: Reconsidering the 1927 Solvay Conference , 2009 .

[55]  C. Emary,et al.  Temporal quantum correlations and Leggett-Garg inequalities in multilevel systems. , 2013, Physical review letters.

[56]  O. Maroney,et al.  Quantum- vs. Macro- Realism: What does the Leggett-Garg Inequality actually test? , 2014, 1412.6139.

[57]  R. Spekkens,et al.  Towards a formulation of quantum theory as a causally neutral theory of Bayesian inference , 2011, 1107.5849.

[58]  O. Maroney How statistical are quantum states , 2012, 1207.6906.

[59]  R. Landauer,et al.  Irreversibility and heat generation in the computing process , 1961, IBM J. Res. Dev..

[60]  Quantum theory of preparation and measurement , 2002, quant-ph/0207174.

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

[62]  Abner Shimony,et al.  Search For A Naturalistic World View , 1993 .

[63]  Matthew F. Pusey The robust noncontextuality inequalities in the simplest scenario , 2015 .

[64]  C. Branciard How ψ-epistemic models fail at explaining the indistinguishability of quantum states. , 2014, Physical review letters.

[65]  M. Leifer ψ-Epistemic models are exponentially bad at explaining the distinguishability of quantum states. , 2014, Physical review letters.

[66]  Man-Duen Choi Completely positive linear maps on complex matrices , 1975 .