A Neglected Route to Realism about Quantum Mechanics

Bell's Theorem assumes that hidden variables are not influenced by future measurement settings. The assumption has sometimes been questioned, but the suggestion has been thought outlandish, even by the taxed standards of the discipline. (Bell thought that it led to fatalism.) The case for this reaction turns out to be surprisingly weak, however. We show that QM easily evades the standard objections to advanced action. And the approach has striking advantages, especially in avoiding the apparent conflict between Bell's Theorem and special relativity. The second part of the paper considers the broader question as to why advanced action seems so counterintuitive. We investigate the origins of our ordinary intuitions about causal asymmetry. It is argued that the view that the past does not depend on the future is largely anthropocentric, a kind of projection of our own temporal asymmetry. Many physicists have also reached this conclusion, but have thought that if causation has no objective direction, there is no objective content to an advanced action interpretation of QM. This turns out to be a mistake. From the ordinary subjective perspective, we can distinguish two sorts of objective world: one "looks as if" it contains only forward causation, the other ``looks as if'' it involves a mix of backward and forward causation. This clarifies the objective core of an advanced action interpretation of QM, and shows that there is an independent symmetry argument in favour of the approach.

[1]  R. Sutherland Bell's theorem and backwards-in-time causality , 1983 .

[2]  N. Mermin What's Wrong with these Elements of Reality? , 1990 .

[3]  P. Horwich On Some Alleged Paradoxes of Time Travel , 1976 .

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

[5]  L. Schulman Deterministic quantum evolution through modification of the hypotheses of statistical mechanics , 1986 .

[6]  Michael Lockwood,et al.  Mind, Brain, and the Quantum: The Compound 'i' , 1991 .

[7]  W. Davidon Quantum physics of single systems , 1976 .

[8]  Huw Price Agency and Causal Asymmetry , 1992 .

[9]  H. Price The asymmetry of radiation: Reinterpreting the Wheeler-Feynman argument , 1991 .

[10]  Albert Einstein,et al.  Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? , 1935 .

[11]  O. C. D. Beauregard Time symmetry and the Einstein paradox. - II , 1979 .

[12]  A. Zeilinger,et al.  Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics , 1989 .

[13]  N. David Mermin,et al.  Quantum Mysteries for Anyone , 1981 .

[14]  Locality, Independence and the Pro-Liberty Bell , 1996, quant-ph/9602020.

[15]  I. Pitowsky,et al.  Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and EPR , 1992, PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association.

[16]  Huw Price The Direction of Causation: Ramsey's Ultimate Contingency , 1992, PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association.

[17]  Paul Davies,et al.  The Ghost in the Atom , 1987 .

[18]  Michael Dummett,et al.  Bringing About the Past , 1964 .

[19]  N. David Mermin,et al.  Is the Moon There When Nobody Looks? Reality and the Quantum Theory , 1985 .

[20]  O. C. D. Beauregard Time symmetry and the Einstein paradox , 1977 .

[21]  Paul Horwich,et al.  Asymmetries in time , 1987 .

[22]  Tim Maudlin,et al.  Quantum non-locality and relativity , 1994 .

[23]  H. Stowell The emperor's new mind R. Penrose, Oxford University Press, New York (1989) 466 pp. $24.95 , 1990, Neuroscience.

[24]  J. Cramer,et al.  An overview of the transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics , 1988 .

[25]  B. D'espagnat,et al.  Nonseparability and the tentative descriptions of reality , 1984 .

[26]  Michael Barr,et al.  The Emperor's New Mind , 1989 .

[27]  C. W. Rietdijk Proof of a retroactive influence , 1978 .