Quantum Mechanics: Not Just a Matter of Interpretation

It has been widely accepted that the rival interpretations of quantum mechanics, e.g., the Copenhagen Interpretation, the Many-Worlds Interpretation, and my father John Cramer’s Transactional Interpretation, cannot be distinguished or falsified by experiment, because the experimental predictions come from the formalism that all such interpretations describe. However, the Afshar Experiment demonstrates in an interaction-free way that there is a loophole in this logic: if the interpretation is inconsistent with the formalism, then it can be falsified. In particular, the Afshar Experiment falsifies the Copenhagen Interpretation, which requires the absence of interference in a particle-type measurement. It also falsifies the Many-Worlds Interpretation which tells us to expect no interference between “worlds” that are physically distinguishable, e.g., that correspond to the photon’s passage through one pinhole or the other.

The Transactional Interpretation, on the other hand, has no problem in explaining that Afshar results. “Offer waves” from the source pass through both pinholes and interfere, creating a condition in which no transactions to the wires can form. Therefore, no photons are intercepted by wires, as Afshar observes. The quantum formalism makes the same predictions. On this basis, it appears that two of the major interpretations of quantum mechanics have been falsified and should be relegated to the waste basket of physics history. The Transactional Interpretation, which involves a forward/back in time handshake, is one of the few (perhaps the only) interpretation(s) left standing after the Afshar test.

Kathryn is the daughter of John Cramer, a physicist whose “Transactional Interpretetation” hypothesis is the only one left intact by the experiment’s findings.

5 thoughts on “Quantum Mechanics: Not Just a Matter of Interpretation”

  1. .
    As I sat here reading and pondering this fascinating and still (to me) not fully underderstood subject — with photons, worlds, pinholes, waves, and possible time-traveling handshakes — the ancient unanswered question came to mind:

    How many angels can dance on the point of a pin? Quantumtatively speaking, of course…

  2. I remember a number of the interference experiments done like this. The diffraction pattern would disappear if there was any way you could detect which hole the photons (or electrons, in other versions) were going through.

    Variations on the theme involved covering the holes or uncovering them after particle emission, but before they get to the slits.

    There’s been a number of different ways to interpret this: pilot waves, every possible universe that can happen does happen, or that the universe is responding to being observed by conscious observers (!).

    Narrowing down the alternatives is an excellent step, although I’m sure there are folks who will have differing opinions about why the interference pattern comes back if the detector is moved to an antinode (a spot where, in the interference pattern, it shows up as dark).

    — Ritchie

Comments are closed.