Show Less
Restricted access

Causal Ubiquity in Quantum Physics

A Superluminal and Local-Causal Physical Ontology

Raphael Neelamkavil

A fixed highest criterial velocity (of light) in STR (special theory of relativity) is a convention for a layer of physical inquiry. QM (Quantum Mechanics) avoids action-at-a-distance using this concept, but accepts non-causality and action-at-a-distance in EPR (Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Paradox) entanglement experiments. Even in such allegedly «non-causal» processes, something exists processually in extension-motion, between the causal and the «non-causal». If STR theoretically allows real-valued superluminal communication between EPR entangled particles, quantum processes become fully causal. That is, the QM world is sub-luminally, luminally and superluminally local-causal throughout, and the Law of Causality is ubiquitous in the micro-world. Thus, «probabilistic causality» is a merely epistemic term.
Show Summary Details
Restricted access



The present monograph attempts to overcome a one-century old opinion in some circles of Physics and Philosophy of Physics. This highly variegated tendency holds that generally Quantum Mechanics (QM), Special Theory of Relativity (STR) and particularly the experimental solutions of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox render some regions of the micro-world non-causal. I wonder how the other regions of the same world can remain causal and not really connected to these “non-causal” regions. Some scientists and thinkers take the “non-causal” regions of the QM world as non-committed (‘acausal’) to causal ubiquity. Some at various periods have gone to the extreme of saying that the ontological nature of things quantum-physical is variously “probability”, “probabilistic causality”, “randomness”, “freedom”, etc., which are ontologically much different from the Universal Law of Causality, which does not take care of these realities in its usual definitions.

Surprisingly, none of these scientists and thinkers endeavors to connect causation and non-causation in the matter-energy field of real physical existence or to show the structure of connection or lack of connection between them. Nor does any of them write off causation or non-causation from the scene rationally. The radical standpoint represented by the present work is to be understood as engendered by the mind-boggling paradoxes which the questions of non-causality and acausality in QM present to sciences of all description, in particular to scientific ontology and philosophy. Can one create a reasonably systematic ontology merely from epistemic-cognitive concepts like “probabilistic causality”, “causal probability”, “random causality” etc. without there...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.

Do you have any questions? Contact us.

Or login to access all content.