via A quantum myth for our times
A talk given at the University of Buenos Aires in June 2017 on the difference between classical systems and quantum ones: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvXYmB2qj88&feature=youtu.be (Note: Some of the slides were missing text here and there due to a compatibility issue; the correct version is provided here: Baires 2017 slides)
This is a preprint version of this paper: AIP Conference Proceedings 1841, 020002 (2017) R. E. Kastner Abstract. Time-symmetric interpretations of quantum theory are often presented as featuring "retrocausal" effects in addition to the usual forward notion of causation. This paper examines the ontological implications of certain time- symmetric theories, and finds that no dynamical notion … Continue reading Is There Really “Retrocausation” in Time-Symmetric Approaches to Quantum Mechanics?
I recently co-authored a paper with TI originator John G. Cramer, which refutes claims that absorption is not well-defined in TI. The paper can be found here: https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.04501
Tom Siegfried, Editor-at-Large and Blogger for Science News, on my recent paper with Stuart Kauffman and Michael Epperson: https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/quantum-mysteries-dissolve-if-possibilities-are-realities
In a nutshell, the measurement problem (MP) is this: given an interaction among quantum systems (such as an unstable atom, atoms comprising a Geiger Counter, atoms comprising a vial of gas, a cat, a friend of Wigner, etc.), which of those interactions constitutes ‘measurement,’ and why? During the past several decades, worries about the MP … Continue reading On the Status of the Measurement Problem: Recalling the Relativistic Transactional Interpretation
http://radicalsciencenews.org/possibilist-transactional-interpetation-quantum-mechanics/#comment-6622 Regarding the Maudlin experiment, this is now nullified by the relativistic developments in PTI: https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.04609