In order to arrive at Bohmian mechanics from standard nonrelativistic quantum mechanics one need do almost nothing! One need only complete the usual quantum description in what is really the most obvious way: by simply including the positions of the particles of a quantum system as part of the state description of that system, allowing these positions to evolve in the most natural way. The entire quantum formalism, including the uncertainty principle and quantum randomness, emerges from an analysis of this evolution. This can be expressed succinctly—though in fact not succinctly enough—by declaring that the essential innovation of Bohmian mechanics is the insight that particles move! 1 Bohmian Mechanics is Minimal Is it not clear from the smallness of the scintillation on the screen that we have to do with a particle? And is it not clear, from the diffraction and interference 1 patterns, that the motion of the particle is directed by a wave? De Broglie showed in detail how the motion of a particle, passing through just one of two holes in screen, could be influenced by waves propagating through both holes.

This article presents a general discussion of several aspects of our present understanding of quantum mechanics. The emphasis is put on the very special correlations that this theory makes possible: they are forbidden by very general arguments based on realism and local causality. In fact, these correlations are completely impossible in any circumstance, except the very special situations designed by physicists especially to observe these purely quantum effects. Another general point that is emphasized is the necessity for the theory to predict the emergence of a single result in a single realization of an experiment. For this purpose, orthodox quantum mechanics introduces a special postulate: the reduction of the state vector, which comes in addition to the Schrödinger evolution postulate. Nevertheless, the presence in parallel of two evolution processes of the same object (the state vector) may be a potential source for conflicts; various attitudes that are possible

While mereotopology -- the theory of boundaries, contact and separation built up on a mereological foundation -- has found fruitful applications in the realm of qualitative spatial reasoning, it faces problems when its methods are extended to deal with those kinds of spatial and non-spatial reasoning which involve a factor of granularity. This is because granularity cannot easily be represented within a mereology-based framework. We sketch how this problem can be solved by means of a theory of coarse-grained partitions, drawing on methods developed for the manipulation of partitions in the spatial realm and applying these to a range of partitions of non-spatial sorts. We then show how these same methods can be extended to apply to finite sequences of partitions evolving over time, or to what we shall call coarse- and fine-grained histories. Keywords: mereotopology, granularity, ontology, partitions, histories 1. Introduction As a result of a series of important contribut...

Abstract. Using numerical calculations, we compare three versions of the Barrett– Crane model of 4-dimensional Riemannian quantum gravity. In the version with face and edge amplitudes as described by De Pietri, Freidel, Krasnov, and Rovelli, we show the partition function diverges very rapidly for many triangulated 4-manifolds. In the version with modified face and edge amplitudes due to Perez and Rovelli, we show the partition function converges so rapidly that the sum is dominated by spin foams where all the spins labelling faces are zero except for small, widely separated islands of higher spin. We also describe a new version which appears to have a convergent partition function without drastic spin-zero dominance. Finally, after a general discussion of how to extract physics from spin foam models, we discuss the implications of convergence or divergence of the partition function for other aspects of a spin foam model. 1.

abstract This paper is a response to some recent discussions of many-minds interpretations in the philosophical literature. After an introduction to the many-minds idea, the complexity of quantum states for macroscopic objects is stressed. Then it is proposed that a characterization of the physical structure of observers is a proper goal for physical theory. It is argued that an observer cannot be defined merely by the instantaneous structure of a brain, but that the history of the brain’s functioning must also be taken into account. Next the nature of probability in many-minds interpretations is discussed and it is suggested that only discrete probability models are needed. The paper concludes with brief comments on issues of actuality and identity over time.

We give a mathematical framework to describe the evolution of an open quantum systems subjected to nitely many interactions with classical apparatuses. The systems in question may be composed of distinct, spatially separated subsystems which evolve independently but may also interact. This evolution, driven both by unitary operators and measurements, is coded in a precise mathematical structure in such a way that the crucial properties of causality, covariance and entanglement are faithfully represented. We show how our framework may be expressed using the language of (poly)categories and functors. Remarkably, important physical consequences - such as covariance - follow directly from the functoriality of our axioms. We establish strong links between the physical picture we propose and linear logic. Specifically we show that the rened logical connectives of linear logic can be used to describe the entanglements of subsystems in a precise way. Furthermore, we show that there is a precise correspondence between the evolution of a given system and deductions in a certain formal logical system based on the rules of linear logic. This framework generalizes and enriches both causal posets and the histories approach to quantum mechanics. 1

Decoherence of a quantum system (which then starts to display classical features) results from the interaction of the system with the environment, and is well described in the framework of the theory of continuous quantum measurements (CQM). Reviewed are the various approaches to the CQM theory, and the approach based on the effective complex Hamiltonians is discussed in greater detail. The effective complex Hamiltonian is derived from the restricted path integral, which emphasizes the role of information in the dynamics of the system being measured. The complex Hamiltonian is used for analyzing the CQM of energy in a two-level system. Such measurement is demonstrated to be capable of monitoring the quantum transition, and the back effect of monitoring on the probability of transition is analyzed. The realization of this type of measurement by a long series

Einstein’s philosophy of physics (as clarified by Fine and Howard) was predicated on his Trennungsprinzip, a combination of separability and locality, without which he believed “physical thought ” and “physical laws ” to be impossible. Bohr’s philosophy (as elucidated by Hooker, Scheibe, Folse, Howard, and others), on the other hand, was grounded in a seemingly different doctrine about the possibility of objective knowledge, namely the necessity of classical concepts. In fact, it follows from Raggio’s Theorem in algebraic quantum theory that within a suitable class of physical theories Einstein’s doctrine is mathematically equivalent to Bohr’s, so that quantum mechanics accommodates Einstein’s Trennungsprinzip if and only if it is interpreted à la Bohr through classical physics. Unfortunately, the protagonists themselves failed to discuss their differences in a constructive way, since in its early phase their debate was blurred by an undue emphasis on the uncertainty relations, whereas in its second stage it was dominated by Einstein’s flawed attempts to establish the “incompleteness ” of quantum mechanics. These two aspects of their debate may still be understood and appreciated, however, as reflecting a much deeper and insurmountable disagreement between Bohr and Einstein on the knowability of Nature. Using the theological controversy on the knowability of God as a analogy, Einstein was a Spinozist, whereas Bohr could be said to be on the side of Maimonides. Thus Einstein’s off-the-cuff characterization of Bohr as a ‘Talmudic philosopher ’ was spot-on.

The aim of the thesis is to define, develop, and consider applications of different measures of dynamical complexity, i.e. the measures that would quantify complexity of system dynamics. These measures are based on the two fundamental notions of Kolmogorov (or algorithmic) complexity and von Neumann entropy. Our main

The simultaneous measurement of several noncommuting observables is modeled by using semigroups of completely positive maps on an algebra with a non-trivial center. The resulting piecewise-deterministic dynamics leads to chaos and to nonlinear iterated function systems (quantum fractals) on complex projective spaces. PACS numbers: 02.50.Ga, 03.65.Ta, 03.65.Yz I.