analiza aiqbench
This paper critically examines the tension between Lorentz invariance and quantum foundations, specifically analyzing how alternative interpretations like Bohmian mechanics and spontaneous collapse models handle relativistic constraints. By applying rigorous criteria such as Anderson's identification of absolute objects, the study clarifies which theoretical frameworks genuinely satisfy substantive Lorentz invariance versus those that only appear invariant superficially. These findings are essential for physicists developing consistent quantum gravity theories or refining our understanding of non-locality in high-energy regimes.
On substantive Lorentz invariance and quantum theory
arXiv:2402.15881v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Lorentz invariance is considered a fundamental property of relativistic quantum theory. However, in standard quantum theory this invariance is only partially realized: while relativistic wave equations like the Dirac equation are Lorentz invariant, the collapse postulate is not. In the non-relativistic domain, alternative theories have been formulated, like Bohmian mechanics and spontaneous collapse theories, which dispense with the problematic collapse postulate. Extending these theories to the relativistic domain appears challenging, particularly with respect to implementing Lorentz invariance, mainly due to the unavoidable non-locality implied by Bell's theorem. However, space-time theories can also trivially be formulated in a Lorentz-invariant way. If Lorentz invariance is to impose a genuine constraint on the content of a physical theory, one should aim for what can be called substantive Lorentz invariance. However, articulating a precise definition of this notion is notoriously difficult. This paper investigates two candidate criteria: Anderson's criterion based on the identification of absolute objects, and a relativity principle for isolated subsystems. These criteria are applied to evaluate several Lorentz-invariant Bohmian models, a spontaneous collapse model, and a version of the Many-Worlds theory. With the exception of two Bohmian approaches, these models satisfy both criteria. Nevertheless, some Bohmian models that meet these conditions still do not appear to be substantively Lorentz invariant, suggesting that the proposed criteria may not fully capture the intended concept. Nevertheless, they help clarify what aspects of relativity theory may need to be given up in passing from classical to quantum theory.
Abstract:Lorentz invariance is considered a fundamental property of relativistic quantum theory. However, in standard quantum theory this invariance is only partially realized: while relativistic wave equations like the Dirac equation are Lorentz invariant, the collapse postulate is not. In the non-relativistic domain, alternative theories have been formulated, like Bohmian mechanics and spontaneous collapse theories, which dispense with the problematic collapse postulate. Extending these theories to the relativistic domain appears challenging, particularly with respect to implementing Lorentz invariance, mainly due to the unavoidable non-locality implied by Bell's theorem. However, space-time theories can also trivially be formulated in a Lorentz-invariant way. If Lorentz invariance is to impose a genuine constraint on the content of a physical theory, one should aim for what can be called substantive Lorentz invariance. However, articulating a precise definition of this notion is notoriously difficult. This paper investigates two candidate criteria: Anderson's criterion based on the identification of absolute objects, and a relativity principle for isolated subsystems. These criteria are applied to evaluate several Lorentz-invariant Bohmian models, a spontaneous collapse model, and a version of the Many-Worlds theory. With the exception of two Bohmian approaches, these models satisfy both criteria. Nevertheless, some Bohmian models that meet these conditions still do not appear to be substantively Lorentz invariant, suggesting that the proposed criteria may not fully capture the intended concept. Nevertheless, they help clarify what aspects of relativity theory may need to be given up in passing from classical to quantum theory.
arXiv:2402.15881 [quant-ph]
(or arXiv:2402.15881v2 [quant-ph] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.15881 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
https://doi.org/10.31389/pop.116 Focus to learn more DOI(s) linking to related resources
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 342 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider Can Test Detector Coherence
Quantum Zeitgeist · 15 aug. 2026
Probing Lorentz-invariance-violation with quantum coherence of Unruh-DeWitt detector
arXiv · 20 iul. 2026
Generalized Foldy-Wouthuysen approach for the derivation of non-relativistic effective field theories
arXiv · 3 sept. 2026

Researchers Achieve Two Limits for Explaining Bell Experiment Results
Quantum Zeitgeist · 22 aug. 2026