Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-zkb6p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T18:07:29.417Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Time Symmetry in Microphysics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Huw Price
Huw Price*
Affiliation:
University of Sydney
*
†School of Philosophy, University of Sydney, Australia 2006.
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Physics takes for granted that interacting systems without common history are independent, before interaction. This principle is time asymmetric, for no such restriction applies to systems without common future, after interaction. The time asymmetry is normally attributed to boundary conditions. I argue that there are two such independence principles at work in contemporary physics, one of which cannot be attributed to boundary conditions, and therefore conflicts with the assumed T-symmetry of microphysics. I note that this may have interesting ramifications in quantum mechanics.

Information

Type
Symposium: New Work on Time's Arrow
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 64 , Issue S4: Supplement. Proceedings of the 1996 Biennial Meetings of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part II: Symposia Papers Dec., 1997 , 1997, pp. S235 - S244
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

‡

This owes much to audiences at the Australian National University, the University of Western Ontario, Columbia University, and the University of Melbourne.

References

Bell, J., Clauser, J., Horne, M., and Shimony, A. (1985), “An Exchange on Local Beables”, Dialectica 39: 85–110.Google Scholar
Bohm, D. (1952), “A Suggested Interpretation of Quantum Theory in Terms of Hidden Variables”, Physical Review 85: 166–193.10.1103/PhysRev.85.166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clifton, R., Pagonis, C., and Pitowsky, I. (1992), “Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and EPR”, in Hull, D., Forbes, M., and Okruhlik, K., (eds.), D. Hull, M. Forbes, and K. Okruhlik, v. 1. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 114–128.Google Scholar
Kochen, S. and Specker, E. P. (1967), “The Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics”, Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics 17: 59–87.Google Scholar
Penrose, O. and Percival, I. C. (1962), “The Direction of Time”, Proceedings of the Physical Society 79: 605–616.10.1088/0370-1328/79/3/318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, H. (1996), Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point: New Directions for the Physics of Time. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar