Back to namelist


Bassam Helou

Different interpretations of quantum mechanics make different predictions in non-linear quantum mechanics, and some do not violate the no-signaling condition

Nonlinear modifications of quantum mechanics have a troubled history. They were initially studied for many promising reasons: resolving the measurement problem, testing the limits of standard quantum mechanics, and reconciling it with gravity. Two results substantially undermined the credibility of non-linear theories. Some have been experimentally refuted, and more importantly, all deterministic non-linear theories can be used for superluminal communication. We highlight a significant drawback of both results: they overlook the fact that the distribution of measurement results predicted by non-linear quantum mechanics depends on the interpretation of quantum mechanics that one uses. For instance, although the Everett and Copenhagen interpretations agree on the expression of Born’s rule for the outcomes of multiple measurements in linear quantum mechanics, they disagree when making predictions in non-linear quantum mechanics. We present the range of expressions of Born’s rule that can be obtained by applying different formulations of quantum mechanics to a class of non-linear quantum theories. We then determine that many do not allow for superluminal communication but only two seem to have a reasonable justification. The first is the Everett interpretation, and the second, which we name causal-conditional, states that a measurement broadcasts its outcome to degrees of freedom in its future light-cone, who update the wavefunction that their non-linear Hamiltonian depends on according to this new information.

Different interpretations of quantum mechanics make different predictions in non-linear quantum mechanics, and some do not violate the no-signaling condition by Bassam Helou
Print Abstract