-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic General "Block Universe" Discussion in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
Like Ken, I don’t understand why people use (tacitly or explicity) a Block Universe (BW) for retrocausality then add a “pseudo-time” or meta-time to artificially create a dynamical notion of “causation.” If you want a robust Now/Becoming, it will cost you lots more formal machinery than a bare BW. But, if you’re willing to pay the price, you can…[Read more]
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic Possibilist Transactional Interpretation in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
Hi Ruth,
I’ve seen Cramer’s “pseudo-time” process of TI mentioned in several topics of this forum being proposed as a way of introducing change and Becoming to the BW (blockworld). I have no idea what meta-time change means empirically and neither it seems do they. In my opinion, if you want an empirically/experientially meaningful notion of…[Read more]
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic Quantum Oblivion and Hesitation in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
Thanks for the detailed reply, Avshalom.
It’s a statement of ignorance of course, but I don’t know how to think about “pseudo-time” processes relative to our experience. A meta-time notion of “change” strikes me as absolutely meaningless. In contrast, the individual proper time frames of PTI are quite apprehensible and have everything you want…[Read more]
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic Retrocausation vs Retrodiction in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
Hi Bob,
I read Ch 24 and I don’t see what you’re proposing for an ontology that accounts for the Mermin device outcomes. All I see are principles of quantum mechanical formalism, which don’t provide any ontology. What physically, not formally, explains the correlations?
Thanks,
Mark -
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic Quantum causal models, faithfulness and retrocausality (onl. 7/16 @ 11pm UTC+10) in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
Hi Pete,
I think I’m close to understanding faithfulness. Let me respond to your last paragraph so you can correct me as necessary.
Retrocausality avoids the non-locality conclusion of Bell inequality violations by denying statistical independence (SI). It does this by providing a causal mechanism that hides a true statistical dependence (…[Read more]
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic Quantum causal models, faithfulness and retrocausality (onl. 7/16 @ 11pm UTC+10) in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
Hi Pete,
I agree completely with your premise that “since it is also the case that we occupy this reality and we have been able to provide rather successful causal and dynamical models representing the phenomena around us, then there must be some sort of story explaining how we can do this given that reality is actually a 4D block obeying said c…[Read more]
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic The Quantum Cheshire Cat Experiment of Denkmayr et al in the forum Pragmatist approaches 8 years, 9 months ago
The arXiv paper has been rewritten in the form it was just today submitted to New J Phys (where Aharonov published his quantum Cheshire Cat proposal and Correa et al. published their qCC paper). Yesterday, Nature Comm said they would not publish our Brief Communication Arising on the refutation because it’s based on an unpublished technical point…[Read more]
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic Quantum causal models, faithfulness and retrocausality (onl. 7/16 @ 11pm UTC+10) in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
Hi Pete,
If you don’t see the connection between my footnote and faithfulness, it’s likely because I don’t properly understand faithfulness and there is no such connection. I was thinking faithfulness implies no ad hoc causal mechanisms, such as fine-tuned future boundary conditions. A time-like causal link that isn’t directed constitutes fine tu…[Read more]
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic General "Block Universe" Discussion in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
Ken,
On p 8 of http://arxiv.org/pdf/1503.00039.pdf Cramer writes, “The transaction that forms after the emitter-absorber offer-confirmation exchange process goes to completion is the real object, what we would call the ‘particle’ that has been transferred from emitter to absorber.” Now look at Figures 3 and 5, and you’ll see that he’s using a BW.…[Read more] -
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic General "Block Universe" Discussion in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
Ken,
I was trying to be exhaustive concerning the view of QM in a BW. To do that I have to include TI with its “pseudo-time” processes. You agree TI is in a BW, right? And having mentioned TI with its “pseudo-time” processes, I had to mention PTI with its proper time evolving BW (of sorts). This is precisely the point of PTI’s departure from…[Read more] -
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic Retrocausation vs Retrodiction in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
Hi Bob,
Retrocausal approaches were designed to explain (among other things) space-like separated correlated experimental outcomes that violate Bell’s inequality without resorting to superluminal mechanisms. I don’t see how such outcomes would be explained by CH from reading your attachment. For example, how does CH explain the outcomes of the…[Read more]
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic General "Block Universe" Discussion in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
Hi Bob,
First let me say that I’ve been using term “blockworld” (BW) for years and was only this year told by my philosopher of science colleague that it’s now “block universe.” Since I’m speaking with a fellow physicist, I’m going to revert to BW 🙂
I received my PhD in general relativity (GR) and have taught it many times, so I perhaps take…[Read more]
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic Quantum Oblivion and Hesitation in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
Thanks for sending the slides, Avshalom. It was difficult to see exactly what they mean in the absence of your corresponding presentation, so my questions and comments may miss the point. I appreciate your willingness to engage on this issue.
The slides you point to (9-10) indicate a “revision of history,” akin to Cramer’s TI “pseu…[Read more]
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic General "Block Universe" Discussion in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
I see physics as trying to construct a single model (called reality) to account coherently for disparate subjective experiences; not all experiences of course, just those that are (assumed) common, (approximately) repeatable and can be represented by laws (rules of regularity). What does special relativity (SR) have to tell us about this…[Read more]
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic The too-late-choice experiment: Bell’s proof applied to a time-reversed setting in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
I hadn’t seen Cramer’s latest paper, thanks for sending it. If that paper reflects your current view on time and the Block Universe, maybe we could discuss it here? My response is rather protracted, so I’ve attached it as a pdf file here.
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic Quantum Oblivion and Hesitation in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
I do recall reading Avshalom’s paper. I’ll respond to him about his view. I hadn’t seen Yakir’s paper, thanks for sharing it. Since that represents your view, let’s discuss it.
On pp 7-8, he writes:
The standard way however is non-covariant as far as the state description is concerned. Indeed, the collapse occurs both at Alice and at Bob at ti…[Read more]
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic Quantum Oblivion and Hesitation in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
I read both papers, Eliahu. Thanks for making them available for discussion in this workshop. Let me begin by inquiring about your view of the block universe implications of this work.
On page 1 of “Voices,” you seem open to the block universe ontology when you write, “It reformulates Oblivion within time-symmetric interpretations of QM, mainl…[Read more]
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic The too-late-choice experiment: Bell’s proof applied to a time-reversed setting in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
I love your twist on EPRB, Avshalom. Entangling the detector direction via beam splitters and post selection is interesting. [Aside: I think you have a typo on p 5, second paragraph. Don’t you mean to “Place detectors on the remaining three ‘up’ SGM exits” instead of “the remaining three ‘down’ SGM exits” in order to complete the measurement for e…[Read more]
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic Relational Blockworld: Providing a Realist Psi-Epistemic Account of QM in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
Glad to see you here, Ken!
Of course, I believe 4D spacetime can be used to model classical causality. However, the phenomena under consideration here are space-like separated correlations that violate Bell’s inequality and those phenomena violate classical causality (as articulated by Wood and Spekkens, for example). Obviously, I’m not “de…[Read more]
-
Mark Stuckey replied to the topic Relational Blockworld: Providing a Realist Psi-Epistemic Account of QM in the forum Retrocausal theories 8 years, 9 months ago
I understand you, Silberstein and Wharton discussed this point and concluded that RBW is, in the sense you state, retrocausal. That’s why we say RBW is retrocausal (however deflationary) in the paper. Frankly, I agree with the referee. As we state in the paper, why bother with retro-time-evolved causal stories in a block universe when the entire…[Read more]
- Load More