From John Cramer, University of Washington
Seattle
Percival labels my transactional interpretation (TI) of standard quantum
mechanics (http://www.npl.washington.edu/ti) as “medieval”, then
proceeds to employ a medieval appeal to authority in support of his view. It is
surprising that he regards the TI as “incompatible with modern science”, since
many modern scientists find it to be the most convenient and transparent way of
thinking through the conundrums of quantum phenomena.
The transactional “handshake” description of quantum events is not
retroactively deterministic, as he implies. In ensuring that your account has a
balance sufficient to cover your purchases, the bank doesn’t determine what you
buy with your card. To claim that the future end of a quantum transaction
determines the past is equally ridiculous.
I have examined the articles to which Percival refers (one of which is by
him) and find no evidence in any of them that standard quantum mechanics had
been falsified by experiment and is in need of revision. Revisionist quantum
theories must remain at the periphery of mainstream physics until such time as
experiments “break” conventional quantum mechanics and cause us to actively seek
alternatives.
Advertisement
In the meantime, it seems preferable to use standard quantum mechanics
together with an interpretation like the TI, which economically accounts for
probability, wave-function collapse, non-locality and other nonintuitive aspects
of the standard theory.
