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

Chapter 11. Causality in a New Double Slit Experiment and in Epr

Extract

In the meantime between the emergence of the Copenhagen interpretation and the recent EPR experiments, there have been many and varied schools of interpretation, including the hidden variables theory, but their relevance for the causal question is slightly reduced, in the face of some of the present-day double slit experiments (and EPR experiments) with their results. That is, many past experiments need not particularly be mentioned because the more recent ones highlight the issues better for our purpose of clarifying the extent of causality that we can conclude for QM. Let us grant our causal conclusion regarding the recent EPR experiments, and use it here in the discussion of a new version of the double slit experiment. As will be clear, the double slit- and EPR experiments and their interpretations can be seen in some way as related. This brings out some fundamental ontological errors in spacetime description based merely on mathematical imagination.

We study a recent double slit experiment and its suggested interpretation to solve the puzzle why the interference patterns disappear when we detect which slit each electron travels through, and why they create interference patterns when unobserved as wavicles. A team of scientists consisting of Stefano Frabboni (University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, and the CNR-Institute of Nanoscience, both in Modena, Italy), Gian Carlo Gazzadi (CNR-Institute of Nanoscience, Modena), and Giulio Pozzi (University of Bologna) used a transmission electron microscope for the modified version of the double slit experiment with a new “which-way” electron detector...

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.