- #1
JG11
- 18
- 2
Does Hardy's paradox show that all realist interpretations cannot be made lorentz invariant? Or is it just realist hidden variable theories?
So this would even apply to the many world interpretation and the GRW theories?Demystifier said:It depends on what exactly do you mean by a realist theory which is not a hidden variable theory. If by realist theory you mean a theory of objects existing out there irrespective of our observations, then the theorem refers to all realist theories.
Yes, provided that "Lorentz invariant" is replaced with the word "local". GRW theories are explicitly non-local. MWI is also not local, but in a somewhat subtle sense explained in https://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/1703.08341 .JG11 said:So this would even apply to the many world interpretation and the GRW theories?
Can the MWI be made lorentz invariant then? GRW? I guess not because of what Hardys paradox shows...?Demystifier said:Yes, provided that "Lorentz invariant" is replaced with the word "non-local". GRW theories are explicitly non-local. MWI is also not local, but in a somewhat subtle sense explained in https://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/1703.08341 .
As I said (but perhaps not sufficiently clearly), this theorem should actually be interpreted as the statement that MWI and GRW cannnot be made local. For a non-local but Lorentz invariant GRW-like theory see https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0406094JG11 said:Can the MWI be made lorentz invariant then? GRW? I guess not because of what Hardys paradox shows...?
Interesting. Say that one formulates the MWI to be as non local as bohmian mechanics (I guess by inserting the non locality by hand), would it still be empirically lorentz invariant like bohmian mechanics?Demystifier said:As I said (but perhaps not sufficiently clearly), this theorem should actually be interpreted as the statement that MWI and GRW cannnot be made local. For a non-local but Lorentz invariant GRW-like theory see https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0406094
Not only empirically Lorentz invariant, but even fundamentally Lorentz invariant.JG11 said:would it still be empirically lorentz invariant like bohmian mechanics?
Does Lucien Hardy come to the wrong conclusion that realist lorentz invariant models make the wrong predictions?Demystifier said:Not only empirically Lorentz invariant, but even fundamentally Lorentz invariant.
Yes. If you want to see what exactly the Hardy's error is, see Sec. A.1.1 of my https://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/1309.0400 .JG11 said:Does Lucien Hardy come to the wrong conclusion that realist lorentz invariant models make the wrong predictions?
"Lorentz invariant" and "local" are two very different properties of a theory. Nonrelativistic QFT is often local. On the other hand, classical relativistic kinetic theory is Lorentz invariant but nonlocal.Demystifier said:provided that "Lorentz invariant" is replaced with the word "local".
Why is it nonlocal? Where does the nonlocality come from?A. Neumaier said:classical relativistic kinetic theory is Lorentz invariant but nonlocal.
because kinetic fields are functions of position and momentum.Demystifier said:Why is it nonlocal? Where does the nonlocality come from?
Hardy's Paradox is a thought experiment proposed by physicist Lucien Hardy in 1992. It involves two entangled particles and the concept of non-locality, which challenges our understanding of causality and the nature of reality.
Lorentz Invariant Realist Interpretation (LIRI) is a proposed solution to Hardy's Paradox. It suggests that the paradox can be resolved by considering the existence of a preferred reference frame in which the two entangled particles are in causal contact. This interpretation is based on the Lorentz invariance principle in special relativity.
The main argument of LIRI is that the paradox arises due to a misunderstanding of the concept of non-locality. LIRI suggests that non-locality should not be seen as a violation of causality, but rather as a consequence of the existence of a preferred reference frame.
LIRI argues that causality is still preserved in the preferred reference frame, as events in this frame occur in a definite order. The apparent non-locality is a result of the fact that different reference frames can have different perceptions of the same events.
No, LIRI is a relatively new and controversial interpretation. While it offers a potential solution to Hardy's Paradox, it has not been widely accepted by the scientific community. Further research and experimentation are needed to fully understand the implications of LIRI and its compatibility with other theories such as quantum mechanics.