The Relational Blockworld Interpretation of Non-relativistic Quantum Mechanics

We introduce a new interpretation of non-relativistic quantum mechanics (QM) called Relational Blockworld (RBW). We motivate the interpretation by outlining two results due to Kaiser, Bohr, Ulfeck, Mottelson, and Anandan, independently. First, the canonical commutation relations for position and momentum can be obtained from boost and translation operators,respectively, in a spacetime where the relativity of simultaneity holds. Second, the QM density operator can be obtained from the spacetime symmetry group of the experimental configuration exclusively. We show how QM, obtained from relativistic quantum field theory per RBW, explains the twin-slit experiment and conclude by resolving the standard conceptual problems of QM, i.e., the measurement problem, entanglement and non-locality

Reconciling Spacetime and the Quantum: Relational Blockworld and the Quantum Liar Paradox

The Relational Blockworld (RBW) interpretation of non-relativistic quantum mechanics (NRQM) is introduced. Accordingly, the spacetime of NRQM is a relational, non-separable blockworld whereby spatial distance is only defined between interacting trans-temporal objects. RBW is shown to provide a novel statistical interpretation of the wavefunction that deflates the measurement problem, as well as a geometric account of quantum entanglement and non-separability that satisfies locality per special relativity and is free of interpretative mystery. We present RBW's acausal and adynamical resolution of the so-called "quantum liar paradox," an experimental set-up alleged to be problematic for a spacetime conception of reality, and conclude by speculating on RBW's implications for quantum gravity.Comment: As accepted for publication in Foundations of Physic

The Relational Blockworld Interpretation of Non-relativistic Quantum Mechanics

We introduce a new interpretation of non-relativistic quantum mechanics (QM) called Relational Blockworld (RBW). We motivate the interpretation by outlining two results due to Kaiser, Bohr, Ulfeck, Mottelson, and Anandan, independently. First, the canonical commutation relations for position and momentum can be obtained from boost and translation operators,respectively, in a spacetime where the relativity of simultaneity holds. Second, the QM density operator can be obtained from the spacetime symmetry group of the experimental configuration exclusively. We show how QM, obtained from relativistic quantum field theory per RBW, explains the twin-slit experiment and conclude by resolving the standard conceptual problems of QM, i.e., the measurement problem, entanglement and non-locality

Deflating Quantum Mysteries via the Relational Blockworld

We present a spacetime setting for non-relativistic quantum mechanics that deflates "quantum mysteries" and relates non-relativistic quantum mechanics to special relativity. This is achieved by assuming spacetime symmetries are fundamental in a blockworld setting, i.e., by interpreting spacetime relations as fundamental to relata. To justify this Relational Blockworld (RBW), we adopt a result due to G. Kaiser whereby the relativity of simultaneity, stemming from the Poincare algebra of special relativity, is responsible for the canonical commutation relations of non-relativistic quantum mechanics. And, we incorporate a result due to A. Bohr, B. Mottelson and O. Ulfbeck whereby the density matrix for a given experimental situation is obtained from its spacetime symmetry group. We provide an example to illustrate the explanatory nature of RBW and conclude by explaining how RBW deflates "quantum mysteries."Comment: Accepted for publication in Physics Essays. 22 pages text, 13 figure

Structuralism and Natural Philosophy: Method, Metaphysics and Explanation

This dissertation is an examination of the foundations of what I call a "fourth" tradition of analytical-scientific philosophy, the tradition of "structuralism". It is a disavowal of a metaphysics of substances and/or entities in the pursuit of scientific theory and truth. We look, in particular, at the current manifestation of this tradition, which advances the thesis of "structural realism"; we ask how tenable this thesis is, and whether we can weaken it. I argue that we should focus on methodology--a program for the formulation of scientific hypotheses about the sorts of things there are--rather than on metaphysics per se. We replace "substance" with "relation" as the basic ontic posit, and hold that substances or entities are metaphysically derivative from relational structure. Thus, the thesis is not that "there are no things" (or that "everything must go", as Ladyman et al. suppose); rather, the thesis is that the things (entities or substances) are relational structure, and there is no complete specification of an independent entity that is not itself more relational structure (so a metaphysics of substances is merely secondary to that of relational structure). I also suggest that there is no complete, unitary or monistic theory of what `structure' itself is. That is, I hold that there is no "total" structure of which everything that is relational structure is a "part", on the grounds that this would constitute an "illegitimate totality" in Russell's sense (the claim that "everything is structural" does not mean that there is a single structure which everything has--what a monistic theory of structure seems to demand). We then turn to the question of scientific explanation in light of structural realism: can there be explanation without a metaphysics of substances? I answer affirmatively. I then turn to two cases where, I argue, structuralism (and the specific thesis of structural realism) is in play regarding scientific explanation: quantum information theory, and the recent attempt to render quantum mechanics local by re-interpreting physical law time symmetrically. I conclude with a consideration of some objections to structuralism, and an articulation of the general view of metaphysics that structuralism seems to presuppose

Reversing the Arrow of Explanation in the Relational Blockworld: Why Temporal Becoming, the Dynamical Brain and the External World Are All "In The Mind"

We introduce the Relational Blockworld (RBW) as a paradigm for deflating the mysteries associated with quantum non-separability/non-locality and the measurement problem. We begin by describing how the relativity of simultaneity implies the blockworld, which has an explanatory potential subsuming both dynamical and relational explanations. It is then shown how the canonical commutation relations fundamental to non-relativistic quantum mechanics follow from the relativity of simultaneity. Therefore, quantum mechanics has at its disposal the full explanatory power of the blockworld. Quantum mechanics exploits this expanded explanatory capability since event distributions among detectors per the density matrix follow from spacetime relations (symmetry group) alone. Thus, the event distributions of non-relativistic quantum mechanics follow from a blockworld wherein spacetime relations are fundamental. Per RBW "quantum mysteries" are deflated and the implications for consciousness and the perception of temporal flow and absolute becoming are explored. We conclude that given RBW, consciousness is no less fundamental than any "physical" feature of the world such as brain states. Further, active consciousness is needed to explain the illusion that it is a dynamical world and consciousness in its most fundamental state is relational and non-local

Nothngness and Science (A Propadeutic)

We characterize science in terms of nihilism: the nihilism of science is something faced not in what science implies, but as the very essence of science as such. The nihilism of science is the birth of the truth of Nietzsche's announcement "God is dead" from within science as it must now face its repressed subjective core. But in truth, as the Psychoanalytic tradition has determined, it is subjectivity itself that is a bottomless searching-the subject is itself born from nothing. In this way it becomes clear that the nihilism of science is in fact the birth of a nothingness as the essence of science insofar as it embraces the nothingness of its own (repressed) subjectivity. Therefore, we show that the proper determination of the crisis of science is not made via phenomenology, as Husserl attempted in the early 20th century, but can only be made properly in a philosophical-psychoanalytic register. This nihilism is encoded within science in its very modality of thought (which also indicates its existential condition as a whole), as Heidegger well understood: science thinks by means of "representation", and it is this "representational thinking" which prevents the expression of the repressed core of subjectivity. Therefore, by overcoming representation, it is seen that science will no longer be in despair to determine itself as a self, but come to see that this self, grounded in nothingness, in fact becomes its greatest and final expression, that is, as a self rooted not in an unending yearning (desire) for the transcendent certainty of a ground, but in a productive desire (a "groundless" becoming)-self as will-to-create, will-to-power (to return to Nietzsche). This transition from the self as rooted in Desire qua lack to a self as determined by an infinitely productive desire is shown to be, in fact, the transition from Lacan to Deleuze. Once this transition is accomplished, it becomes clear that the anti-representational mode of thinking, accompanied by the productive self as will-to-power, determines science not from a transcendent metaphysic (i.e., as a metaphysically "grounded" praxis), but as an aesthetically determined modality of pure creativity-i.e., as an art. We then conclude by speculating on the proper form of art that this new science should take. We see that anti-representational thinking, rooted in the self as infinite creativity (as will-to-create), is determined not by concepts, but by play ("agon") or performances (performance as concept). Perhaps, then, we should consider music as determining the proper artistic form of this new kind of science? In this way we finally come to see the possibility for the first time of music as a new kind of science

The relational blockworld interpretation of non-relativistic quantum mechanics

We introduce a new interpretation of non-relativistic quantum mechanics (QM) called Relational Blockworld (RBW). We motivate the interpretation by outlining two results due to Kaiser, Bohr, Ulfeck, Mottelson, and Anandan, independently. First, the canonical commutation relations for position and momentum can be obtained from boost and translation operators, respectively, in a spacetime where the relativity of simultaneity holds. Second, the QM density operator can be obtained from the spacetime symmetry group of the experimental configuration exclusively. We show how QM, obtained from relativistic quantum field theory per RBW, explains the twin-slit experiment and conclude by resolving the standard conceptual problems of QM, i.e., the measurement problem, entanglement and non-locality. © 2007 American Institute of Physics

Reconciling spacetime and the quantum: Relational blockworld and the quantum liar paradox

The Relational Blockworld (RBW) interpretation of non-relativistic quantum mechanics (NRQM) is introduced. Accordingly, the spacetime of NRQM is a relational, non-separable blockworld whereby spatial distance is only defined between interacting trans-temporal objects. RBW is shown to provide a novel statistical interpretation of the wavefunction that deflates the measurement problem, as well as a geometric account of quantum entanglement and non-separability that satisfies locality per special relativity and is free of interpretative mystery. We present RBW\u27s acausal and adynamical resolution of the so-called quantum liar paradox, an experimental set-up alleged to be problematic for a spacetime conception of reality, and conclude by speculating on RBW\u27s implications for quantum gravity. © 2008 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC