Philosophy of Physics Discussion Club: Mini-Workshop next Thursday

43 views
Skip to first unread message

Guy Hetzroni

unread,
Mar 2, 2025, 5:56:14 AMMar 2
to Philosophy of Physics Discussion Club
Dear friends, 

Below are the full details and abstracts for our upcoming mini-workshop:
Philosophy of Physics Discussion Club: 2025 Mini-Workshop
Time: March 13th, 16:00-19:30
Place: Gilman 261, Tel-Aviv University. 

Program
Aviram Rosochotsky (Tel-Aviv University): Temporal relationalism in intrinsic dynamics
Avi Levy (with Meir Hemmo; University of Haifa): Quantum Field Theory and the Measurement Problem in Quantum Mechanics
Joab Rosenberg (Weizmann institute): Epistemic Physics: Putting information into the Hamiltonian

Abstracts
Temporal relationalism in intrinsic dynamics \ Aviram Rosochotsky (Tel-Aviv University)
Temporal relationalism is the idea that time is reducible to change. In my talk I will argue that a certain formalism, which I call, following Barbour and Bertotti (1982), Intrinsic Dynamics, shows the reduction of time to change in precise mathematical terms.


Quantum Field Theory and the Measurement Problem in Quantum Mechanics \  Avi Levy (with Meir Hemmo; University of Haifa)

The measurement problem in Quantum Mechanics (QM) arises from the discrepancy between the unitary temporal evolution of quantum states dictated by the Schrödinger equation (in the non-relativistic case) and the non-unitary evolution (collapse) of the quantum state in a measurement process. In Quantum Field Theory (QFT), the standard interpretation of the S-matrix scattering formalism assumes that the in-state of an interacting system evolves unitarily to a superposition of all possible out-states and it collapses to a unique out-state only when a measurement is performed. Hence, QFT too is subject to the measurement problem.
In this paper we propose a novel physical solution to the measurement problem based on QFT. According to our proposal, there exists a 
collapse” trigger in the S-matrix formalism of QFT. This trigger occurs in certain types of elementary interactions, in which the “particles content” of the system is changed and the evolution is indeed non-unitary. We argue that these interactions, which are almost instantaneous, lead to a genuine stochastic selection of an outcome subspace that has a distinct particles content, but can be a superposition of states with different individual particles momentum, spin etc.

Our proposal is supported by Haags theorem form which it follows that the existence of a unitary evolution from every free in-state to every free out-state of a non-trivial interaction is mathematically unsound. A version of Haags theorem implies that a non-unitary evolution occurs in those processes where new types of particles are created and / or destroyed leading to a “particles content” change. Since in QM such processes are excluded (because the particles content of a physical system is fixed), the appearance of a collapse” of the wavefunction in QM seems mysterious. Not so, we argue, in QFT.

We address and explain in detail the key concept of particles content change in QFT (which requires clarification) as well as the locality properties of non-unitary processes. Finally, we show that in typical measurement processes, there is a well-defined non-unitary stage. Our proposal de-mystifies the projection postulate for measurement in the standard formulation of QM in that it identifies the physical conditions under which the “collapse” occurs. We argue that non-unitary processes are not specific to measurement since they occur in other naturally originated processes in which there is a particles content change. We further argue that our proposal is consistent with all known experimental results in QM and QFT.



Epistemic Physics: Putting information into the Hamiltonian \ Joab Rosenberg (Weizmann institute)
The talk is offering a work in progress in which a new formalism tackle the role of the observer in physics. The proposed formalism is borrowed from Epistemic Logic, and is implemented within physics based on Landauer's idea according to which each gain/loss of a bit of knowledge is equivalent to a quanta of energy of $k_BTln2$. Given that this is the case, we can insert the knowledge gained by an observer during measurement into the Hamiltonian, thus closing the loop on a full description of the system, the measuring device and the observer/knower. Furthermore, the formalism of Epistemic Logic allows us to consider a group of knowers (e.g. a couple of them in the Wigner's friend scenario, or Alice and Bob in the EPR experiment) and to implement the Ising model to consider the creation of consensus among a very large community of observers. I will describe some physics scenarios in which this enrichment of the formalism can help by shedding new light on old debates, and even offer new experiments to try and validate or falsify the new ideas.

Looking forward to seeing you there, 
Guy. 


Dr. Guy Hetzroni

Guy Hetzroni

unread,
Mar 12, 2025, 3:29:44 AMMar 12
to Philosophy of Physics Discussion Club
Dear all, 

This is to remind you of our mini-workshop tomorrow. Below are the full details and abstracts.

Guy Hetzroni

unread,
Mar 13, 2025, 10:00:12 AMMar 13
to Philosophy of Physics Discussion Club
Dear all, 

Following some requests, here is a zoom link for our meeting (starting now). 

All the best, 
Guy. 

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages