English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Recently there have emerged an assortment of theorems relating to the'absoluteness of emerged events,' and these results have sometimes been used toargue that quantum mechanics may involve some kind of metaphysically radicalnon-absoluteness, such as relationalism or perspectivalism. However, in ourview a close examination of these theorems fails to convincingly support suchpossibilities. In this paper we argue that the Wigner's friend paradox, thetheorem of Bong et al and the theorem of Lawrence et al are all best understoodas demonstrating that if quantum mechanics is universal, and if certainauxiliary assumptions hold, then the world inevitably includes various forms of'disaccord,' but this need not be interpreted in a metaphysically radical way;meanwhile, the theorem of Ormrod and Barrett is best understood either as anargument for an interpretation allowing multiple outcomes per observer, such asthe Everett approach, or as a proof that quantum mechanics cannot be universalin the sense relevant for this theorem. We also argue that these theorems takentogether suggest interesting possibilities for a different kind of relationalapproach in which dynamical states are relativized whilst observed events areabsolute, and we show that although something like 'retrocausality' might beneeded to make such an approach work, this would be a very special kind ofretrocausality which would evade a number of common objections againstretrocausality. We conclude that the non-absoluteness theorems may have asignificant role to play in helping converge towards an acceptable solution tothe measurement problem.

What Does '(Non)-Absoluteness of Observed Events' Mean?