Randomness in Relational Quantum Mechanics

TL;DR

This paper explores how the relational interpretation of quantum mechanics (RQM) offers a unique perspective on quantum randomness, emphasizing that relational states do not collapse but retain previous variables, with detailed analysis of the dual-slit experiment.

Contribution

It provides a detailed analysis of the nature of quantum randomness within RQM, highlighting how relational states differ from other interpretations and illustrating this through the dual-slit experiment.

Findings

Relational states retain previous variables without collapse.

Quantum randomness in RQM differs from other interpretations.

Dual-slit experiment is consistent but interpreted differently in RQM.

Abstract

The relational interpretation of quantum mechanics (RQM), introduced in its present form by Carlo Rovelli in 1996, involves a number of significant departures from other QM interpretations widely discussed in the literature. We begin here by summarizing these unique RQM features, with a focus on those that suggest altered insights into the nature of the randomness exhibited in QM phenomena. One of these RQM features is the assumption that all objects in the universe are quantum objects, regardless of their material complexity. And, the interaction of any two objects can result in new relational quantum states of each of the objects with the other as reference. But such new states do not replace relational states corresponding to previous interactions with other reference objects. In particular, such earlier relational states that include a variable considered to be random do not collapse to define a determined value of the variable, but instead simply take on that specific value in the state relative to the new reference. The concept of randomness associated with quantum state variables in RQM thus differs from that in other QM interpretations. Rather than take the usual pedantic approach of elaborate side-by-side comparisons between the RQM and other common QM interpretations, we illustrate these differences by describing in some detail the well-known "dual-slit" experiment in terms of RQM concepts, pointing out the important advantages over other interpretations along the way. Of course, we suggest no change in dual-slit experiment results, but believe that the interpretative modifications are helpful and profound.