Knowledge

Counterfactual definiteness

Source 📝

321:
argumentations. In such reasonings it is assumed that, if some set of manipulations were carried out, then the resulting physical processes would give rise to effects which are determined by the formal laws of the theory applying in the envisaged domain of experimentation. The physical justification of counterfactual reasoning depends on the context in which it is used. Rigorously speaking, given some theoretical framework, such reasoning is always allowed and justified as soon as one is sure of the possibility of at least one realization of the pre-assumed set of manipulations. In general, in counterfactual reasoning it is even understood that the physical situations to which the reasoning applies can be reproduced at will, and hence may be realized more than once."Text was downloaded from:
148:(called "up tack" or "eet") denotes an undefined value. To use a macroscopic analogy, an interpretation which rejects counterfactual definiteness views measuring the position as akin to asking where in a room a person is located, while measuring the momentum is akin to asking whether the person's lap is empty or has something on it. If the person's position has changed by making him or her stand rather than sit, then that person has no lap and neither the statement "the person's lap is empty" nor "there is something on the person's lap" is true. Any statistical calculation based on values where the person is standing at some place in the room and simultaneously has a lap as if sitting would be meaningless. 460:
of non-locality there in defined), Subsequently, Bell' s theorem has been generalized to cover stochastic hidden variable theories. Commenting on Bell' s earlier paper. Stapp (1971) suggests that the proof rests on the assumption of "counterfactual definiteness" : essentially the assumption that subjunctive conditionals of the form: " If measurement M had been performed, result R would have been obtained" always have a definite truth value (even for measurements that were not carried out because incompatible measurements were being made) and that the quantum mechanical statistics are the probabilities of such conditionals." p. 1 arXiv:quant-ph/0104062v1
236:
algebraic operations to derive Bell's inequality cannot proceed due to having no value or many values where a single value is required, in Consistent Histories, they can be performed but the resulting correlation coefficients can not be equated with those that would be obtained by actual measurements (which are instead given by the rules of quantum mechanical formalism). The derivation combines incompatible results only some of which could be factual for a given experiment and the rest counterfactual.
399:
influence the future evolution of the world. But in quantum mechanics it is otherwise. The potential for an event to happen can influence future outcomes even if the event does not happen. Something that could happen but actually does not is called as counterfactual. In quantum mechanics counterfactuals are observable—they have measurable consequences. The Elitzur-Vaidman bomb test provides a striking illustration of this."
39:. In such discussions "meaningfully" means the ability to treat these unmeasured results on an equal footing with measured results in statistical calculations. It is this (sometimes assumed but unstated) aspect of counterfactual definiteness that is of direct relevance to physics and mathematical models of physical systems and not philosophical concerns regarding the meaning of unmeasured results. 31:) is the ability to speak "meaningfully" of the definiteness of the results of measurements that have not been performed (i.e., the ability to assume the existence of objects, and properties of objects, even when they have not been measured). The term "counterfactual definiteness" is used in discussions of physics calculations, especially those related to the phenomenon called 340:
Enrique J. Galvez, "Undergraduate Laboratories Using Correlated Photons: Experiments on the Fundamentals of Quantum Mechanics," p. 2ff., says, "Bell formulated a set of inequalities, now known as 'Bell’s inequalities,' that would test non-locality. Should an experiment verify these inequalities, then
230:
approach rejects counterfactual definiteness in yet another manner; it ascribes single but hidden values to unperformed measurements and disallows combining values of incompatible measurements (counterfactual or factual) as such combinations do not produce results that would match any obtained purely
213:
rejects counterfactual definiteness in a different sense; instead of not assigning a value to measurements that were not performed, it ascribes many values. When measurements are performed each of these values gets realized as the resulting value in a different world of a branching reality. As Prof.
459:
Yakir Aharonov, et al, "Revisiting Hardy's Paradox: Counterfactual Statements, Real Measurements, Entanglement and Weak Values," says, "In 1964 Bell published a proof that any deterministic hidden variable theory that reproduces the quantum mechanical statistics must be nonlocal (in a precise sense
426:
Yakir Aharonov et al., "Revisiting Hardy's Paradox: Counterfactual Statements, Real Measurements, Entanglement and Weak Values, p. 1, says, "For example, according to Heisenberg’s uncertainty relations, an absolutely precise measurement of position reduces the uncertainty in position to zero Δx = 0
159:
would be predicted to fall within certain limits based on all three of these assumptions, which are considered principles fundamental to classical physics, but that the results found within those limits would be inconsistent with the predictions of quantum mechanical theory. Experiments have shown
440:
Yakir Aharonov, et al, "Revisiting Hardy's Paradox: Counterfactual Statements, Real Measurements, Entanglement and Weak Values," p.1 says, "The main argument against counterfactual statements is that if we actually perform measurements to test them, we disturb the system significantly, and in such
310:
Inge S. Helland, "A new foundation of quantum mechanics," p. 386: "Counterfactual definiteness is defined as the ability to speak with results of measurements that have not been performed (i.e., the ability to assure the existence of objects, and properties of objects, even when they have not been
70:
If physics rejects the possibility that, in all cases, there can be "counterfactual definiteness," then it rejects some features that humans are very much accustomed to regarding as enduring features of the universe. "The elements of reality the EPR paper is talking about are nothing but what the
114:
of a particle. Suppose one measures the position of a particle. This act destroys any information about its momentum. Is it then possible to talk about the outcome that one would have obtained if one had measured its momentum instead of its position? In terms of mathematical formalism, is such a
102:
can be said to involve the use of counterfactual definiteness if it includes in the mathematical modelling outcomes of measurements that are counterfactual; in particular, those that are excluded according to quantum mechanics by the fact that quantum mechanics does not contain a description of
320:
W. M. de Muynck, W. De Baere, and H. Martens, "Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics, Joint Measurement of Incompatible Observables, and Counterfactual Definiteness" p. 54 says: "Counterfactual reasoning deals with nonactual physical processes and events and plays an important role in physical
398:
Rick Bradford, "The Observability of Counterfactuals" p.1. "Suppose something could have happened, but actually did not happen. In classical physics the fact that an event could have happened but didn't can make no difference to any future outcome. Only those things which actually happen can
235:
likens these to "slips of paper" placed in "opaque envelopes". Thus Consistent Histories does not reject counterfactual results per se, it rejects them only when they are being combined with incompatible results. Whereas in the Copenhagen interpretation or the Many Worlds interpretation, the
174:
Counterfactual definiteness is present in any interpretation of quantum mechanics that allows quantum mechanical measurement outcomes to be seen as deterministic functions of a system's state or of the state of the combined system and measurement apparatus. Cramer's (1986)
196:
of quantum mechanics rejects counterfactual definiteness as it does not ascribe any value at all to a measurement that was not performed. When measurements are performed, values result, but these are not considered to be revelations of pre-existing values. In the words of
47:
The subject of counterfactual definiteness receives attention in the study of quantum mechanics because it is argued that, when challenged by the findings of quantum mechanics, classical physics must give up its claim to one of three assumptions:
115:
counterfactual momentum measurement to be included, together with the factual position measurement, in the statistical population of possible outcomes describing the particle? If the position were found to be
160:
that quantum mechanical results predictably exceed those classical limits. Calculating expectations based on Bell's work implies that for quantum physics the assumption of "local realism" must be abandoned.
66:
If physics gives up the "no conspiracy" condition, it becomes possible for "nature to force experimenters to measure what she wants, and when she wants, hiding whatever she does not like physicists to see."
71:
property interpretation calls properties existing independently of the measurements. In each run of the experiment, there exist some elements of reality, the system has particular properties < #a
341:
nature would be demonstrated to be local and quantum mechanics incorrect. Conversely, a measurement of a violation of the inequalities would vindicate quantum mechanics’ non-local properties."
63:
If physics gives up the claim to locality, it brings into question our ordinary ideas about causality and suggests that events may transpire at faster-than-light speeds.
57: 350:
Gábor Hofer-Szabó, Miklós Rédei, László E. Szabó, "The principle of the common cause" (Cambridge 2013), Sect. 9.2 "Local and nonconspiratorial common cause systems".
359:
T.N. Palmer "Bell's conspiracy, Schrödinger's black cat and global invariant sets", Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 2015, vol. 373, issue 2047.
122:
then in an interpretation that permits counterfactual definiteness, the statistical population describing position and momentum would contain all pairs (
792: 151:
The dependability of counterfactually definite values is a basic assumption, which, together with "time asymmetry" and "local causality" led to the
231:
from performed compatible measurements. When a measurement is performed the hidden value is nevertheless realized as the resulting value.
286: 171:
reject the possibility of extending the mathematical description with outcomes of measurements which were not actually made.
86:
As a noun, "counterfactual" may refer to an inferred effect or consequence of an unobserved macroscopic event. An example is
271: 99: 291: 218:
puts it, "The many-worlds interpretation is not only counterfactually indefinite, it is factually indefinite as well."
87: 325: 787: 389:
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, "The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Argument and the Bell Inequalities," section 3.
251: 808: 256: 232: 176: 53: 368:
Christoph Saulder, "Contextuality and the Kochen-Specker Theorem", p. 11. Available from the author at:
210: 369: 193: 137:, whereas an interpretation that rejects counterfactual values completely would only have the pair ( 110:
states that one cannot simultaneously know, with arbitrarily high precision, both the position and
156: 266: 107: 49: 60:(called also "asymmetry of time"), or counterfactual definiteness (or "non-contextuality"). 719: 658: 597: 544: 501: 227: 32: 578:
Blaylock, Guy (2010). "The EPR paradox, Bell's inequality, and the question of locality".
8: 723: 662: 601: 548: 505: 400: 743: 709: 682: 648: 621: 587: 276: 165: 747: 735: 674: 625: 613: 560: 517: 161: 152: 36: 20: 686: 182: 727: 666: 605: 552: 509: 281: 261: 329: 788:
https://web.archive.org/web/20070710011825/http://www.phys.tue.nl/ktn/Wim/i.pdf
489: 469: 731: 670: 513: 802: 739: 678: 617: 564: 521: 411: 215: 700:
Griffiths, Robert B. (2012-03-16). "Quantum Counterfactuals and Locality".
428: 155:. Bell showed that the results of experiments intended to test the idea of 246: 198: 793:
Nil Communication: How to Send a Message without Sending Anything at All
380:
Angel G. Valdenebro, "Assumptions Underlying Bell's Inequalities," p. 6.
322: 782: 778: 768: 763: 492:(1986-07-01). "The transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics". 609: 556: 773: 370:
http://www.equinoxomega.net/files/studies/quantenphysik_Handout.pdf
111: 714: 653: 592: 164:
proves that every type of quantum theory must necessarily violate
183:
Examples of interpretations rejecting counterfactual definiteness
75:> which unambiguously determine the measurement outcome < a 535:
Peres, Asher (1978). "Unperformed experiments have no results".
769:
On Bell and CFD by W. M. de Muynck, W. De Baere, and H. Martens
543:(7). American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT): 745–747. 450:
Inge S. Helland, "A new foundation of quantum mechanics," p. 3.
427:
but produces an infinite uncertainty in momentum Δp = ∞." See
145: 103:
simultaneous measurement of conjugate pairs of properties.
571: 764:
Quantum nonlocality without counterfactual definiteness?
639:
Griffiths, Robert B. (2010-10-21). "Quantum Locality".
528: 693: 632: 401:
http://www.rickbradford.co.uk/QM13Counterfactuals.pdf
800: 500:(3). American Physical Society (APS): 647–687. 79:>, given that the corresponding measurement 484: 482: 93: 187: 201:"unperformed experiments have no results". 479: 713: 699: 652: 638: 591: 441:disturbed conditions no paradoxes arise." 415:S-matrix interpretation of quantum-theory 577: 429:https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0104062v1 474:Bohm's Alternative to Quantum Mechanics 392: 221: 801: 488: 417:Physical Review D Vol 3 #6 1303 (1971) 534: 323:http://www.phys.tue.nl/ktn/Wim/i1.pdf 272:Renninger negative-result experiment 133:) for every possible momentum value 287:Wheeler's delayed choice experiment 216:University of Massachusetts Amherst 179:does not make that interpretation. 100:interpretation of quantum mechanics 13: 292:Counterfactual quantum computation 88:counterfactual quantum computation 14: 820: 757: 708:(5). Springer Nature: 674–684. 647:(4). Springer Nature: 705–733. 463: 453: 444: 434: 420: 405: 476:Scientific American (May 1994) 383: 374: 362: 353: 344: 334: 314: 304: 204: 1: 298: 257:Interaction-free measurement 177:transactional interpretation 16:Concept in quantum mechanics 7: 580:American Journal of Physics 537:American Journal of Physics 252:Elitzur–Vaidman bomb-tester 239: 54:spooky action at a distance 42: 25:counterfactual definiteness 10: 825: 795:(Roebke. Sci.Am June 2017) 211:many-worlds interpretation 94:Theoretical considerations 732:10.1007/s10701-012-9637-9 671:10.1007/s10701-010-9512-5 514:10.1103/revmodphys.58.647 494:Reviews of Modern Physics 194:Copenhagen interpretation 188:Copenhagen interpretation 35:and those related to the 431:arXiv:quant-ph/0104062v1 702:Foundations of Physics 641:Foundations of Physics 267:Quantum indeterminacy 108:uncertainty principle 228:consistent histories 222:Consistent histories 214:Guy Blaylock of the 33:quantum entanglement 809:Quantum measurement 779:CFD by Stapp (1988) 774:CFD by Brian Skyrms 724:2012FoPh...42..674G 663:2011FoPh...41..705G 602:2010AmJPh..78..111B 549:1978AmJPh..46..745P 506:1986RvMP...58..647C 328:2013-04-12 at the 277:Scientific realism 610:10.1119/1.3243279 153:Bell inequalities 106:For example, the 37:Bell inequalities 21:quantum mechanics 816: 752: 751: 717: 697: 691: 690: 656: 636: 630: 629: 595: 575: 569: 568: 532: 526: 525: 486: 477: 467: 461: 457: 451: 448: 442: 438: 432: 424: 418: 409: 403: 396: 390: 387: 381: 378: 372: 366: 360: 357: 351: 348: 342: 338: 332: 318: 312: 308: 282:Superdeterminism 233:Robert Griffiths 192:The traditional 157:hidden variables 824: 823: 819: 818: 817: 815: 814: 813: 799: 798: 760: 755: 698: 694: 637: 633: 576: 572: 557:10.1119/1.11393 533: 529: 490:Cramer, John G. 487: 480: 468: 464: 458: 454: 449: 445: 439: 435: 425: 421: 410: 406: 397: 393: 388: 384: 379: 375: 367: 363: 358: 354: 349: 345: 339: 335: 330:Wayback Machine 319: 315: 309: 305: 301: 296: 242: 224: 207: 190: 185: 142: 127: 120: 96: 83:is performed." 78: 74: 45: 17: 12: 11: 5: 822: 812: 811: 797: 796: 790: 785: 776: 771: 766: 759: 758:External links 756: 754: 753: 692: 631: 586:(1): 111–120. 570: 527: 478: 470:David Z Albert 462: 452: 443: 433: 419: 404: 391: 382: 373: 361: 352: 343: 333: 313: 302: 300: 297: 295: 294: 289: 284: 279: 274: 269: 264: 259: 254: 249: 243: 241: 238: 223: 220: 206: 203: 189: 186: 184: 181: 162:Bell's theorem 140: 125: 118: 95: 92: 76: 72: 44: 41: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 821: 810: 807: 806: 804: 794: 791: 789: 786: 784: 780: 777: 775: 772: 770: 767: 765: 762: 761: 749: 745: 741: 737: 733: 729: 725: 721: 716: 711: 707: 703: 696: 688: 684: 680: 676: 672: 668: 664: 660: 655: 650: 646: 642: 635: 627: 623: 619: 615: 611: 607: 603: 599: 594: 589: 585: 581: 574: 566: 562: 558: 554: 550: 546: 542: 538: 531: 523: 519: 515: 511: 507: 503: 499: 495: 491: 485: 483: 475: 471: 466: 456: 447: 437: 430: 423: 416: 413: 412:Henry P Stapp 408: 402: 395: 386: 377: 371: 365: 356: 347: 337: 331: 327: 324: 317: 307: 303: 293: 290: 288: 285: 283: 280: 278: 275: 273: 270: 268: 265: 263: 262:Naïve realism 260: 258: 255: 253: 250: 248: 245: 244: 237: 234: 229: 219: 217: 212: 202: 200: 195: 180: 178: 172: 170: 167: 163: 158: 154: 149: 147: 143: 136: 132: 128: 121: 113: 109: 104: 101: 91: 89: 84: 82: 68: 64: 61: 59: 58:no-conspiracy 55: 51: 40: 38: 34: 30: 26: 22: 705: 701: 695: 644: 640: 634: 583: 579: 573: 540: 536: 530: 497: 493: 473: 465: 455: 446: 436: 422: 414: 407: 394: 385: 376: 364: 355: 346: 336: 316: 306: 225: 208: 191: 173: 168: 150: 138: 134: 130: 123: 116: 105: 97: 85: 80: 69: 65: 62: 46: 28: 24: 18: 311:measured"). 247:Determinism 205:Many worlds 199:Asher Peres 299:References 144:,⊥) where 748:118796867 740:0015-9018 715:1201.0255 679:0015-9018 654:0908.2914 626:118520639 618:0002-9505 593:0902.3827 565:0002-9505 522:0034-6861 803:Category 687:15312828 326:Archived 240:See also 166:locality 112:momentum 50:locality 43:Overview 720:Bibcode 659:Bibcode 598:Bibcode 545:Bibcode 502:Bibcode 746:  738:  685:  677:  624:  616:  563:  520:  744:S2CID 710:arXiv 683:S2CID 649:arXiv 622:S2CID 588:arXiv 52:(no " 783:1990 781:and 736:ISSN 675:ISSN 614:ISSN 561:ISSN 518:ISSN 226:The 209:The 56:"), 728:doi 667:doi 606:doi 553:doi 510:doi 98:An 29:CFD 19:In 805:: 742:. 734:. 726:. 718:. 706:42 704:. 681:. 673:. 665:. 657:. 645:41 643:. 620:. 612:. 604:. 596:. 584:78 582:. 559:. 551:. 541:46 539:. 516:. 508:. 498:58 496:. 481:^ 472:, 169:or 90:. 23:, 750:. 730:: 722:: 712:: 689:. 669:: 661:: 651:: 628:. 608:: 600:: 590:: 567:. 555:: 547:: 524:. 512:: 504:: 146:⊥ 141:0 139:r 135:p 131:p 129:, 126:0 124:r 119:0 117:r 81:a 77:i 73:i 27:(

Index

quantum mechanics
quantum entanglement
Bell inequalities
locality
spooky action at a distance
no-conspiracy
counterfactual quantum computation
interpretation of quantum mechanics
uncertainty principle
momentum

Bell inequalities
hidden variables
Bell's theorem
locality
transactional interpretation
Copenhagen interpretation
Asher Peres
many-worlds interpretation
University of Massachusetts Amherst
consistent histories
Robert Griffiths
Determinism
Elitzur–Vaidman bomb-tester
Interaction-free measurement
Naïve realism
Quantum indeterminacy
Renninger negative-result experiment
Scientific realism
Superdeterminism

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.