On StappUnruhMermin Discussion on Quantum Nonlocality Quantum Jumps and Relativity.pdfVIP

On Stapp-Unruh-Mermin Discussion on Quantum Nonlocality: Quantum Jumps and Relativity Vladimir S. MASHKEVICH1 8 9 9 1 Institute of Physics, National academy of sciences of Ukraine n 252028 Kiev, Ukraine a J 5 1 1 v Abstract 2 3 0 We argue that the participants of the discussion have overlooked an essential circumstance, 1 0 in view of which Stapp’s fifth proposition fails. The circumstance is that though L and R mea- 8 surements, being causally separated, are not invariantly time ordered, quantum-jump hyper- 9 / surfaces associated with the measurements are causelikewise ordered. Stapp’s fifth proposition h p is true iff L hypersurface precedes R one; but within the limits of special relativity, it is impos- t- sible to determine the causelike order of those hypersurfaces. The entire Stapp’s construct is n revised. a u q : v i X r a 1Email: mash@gluk.apc.org 1 Introduction In a recent paper [1] Stapp made a sophisticated attempt to breathe new life into the problem of quantum nonlocality. The paper raised objections by Unruh [2] and Mermin [3], which resulted in a discussion on that problem [4-8]. The aim of Stapp’s construct is the conclusion that there exists a backward-in-time influence. Stapp’s fifth proposition is the cornerstone of the construct. Unruh and Mermin argue that the conclusion is untenable, though they grant the fifth proposition. Finkelstein [8] argues that the fifth proposition should be specified through consideration of a hypothetical world. We argue that the participants of the discussion have overlooked an essential circumstance, in view of which Sta