
TL;DR
Quantum histories formalism offers a framework for understanding quantum events and their selection criteria, but current approaches are weak and cannot fully reproduce classical or Copenhagen quantum mechanics predictions, though collapse models offer promising directions.
Contribution
The paper analyzes various quantum histories formalisms, highlights their limitations, and proposes reinterpreting collapse models as set selection criteria within this framework.
Findings
Current selection criteria are too weak to derive classical mechanics.
Collapse models can be integrated as set selection criteria.
The approach suggests new paths for relativistic quantum models.
Abstract
There are good motivations for considering some type of quantum histories formalism. Several possible formalisms are known, defined by different definitions of event and by different selection criteria for sets of histories. These formalisms have a natural interpretation, according to which nature somehow chooses one set of histories from among those allowed, and then randomly chooses to realise one history from that set; other interpretations are possible, but their scientific implications are essentially the same. The selection criteria proposed to date are reasonably natural, and certainly raise new questions. For example, the validity of ordering inferences which we normally take for granted --- such as that a particle in one region is necessarily in a larger region containing it --- depends on whether or not our history respects the criterion of ordered consistency, or merely…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
