MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911466494 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.124028

Realism and causality. II. Retrocausality in energetic causal sets

2020· article· en· W2911466494 on OpenAlexafffund
Eliahu Cohen, Marina Cortês, Avshalom C. Elitzur, Lee Smolin

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Mechanics and Applications
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFoundational Questions InstituteOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceGovernment of CanadaJohn Templeton Foundation
KeywordsCausality (physics)Minkowski spaceCausal setsCausal structureEmbeddingOrder (exchange)SpacetimeClass (philosophy)Causal modelRealismTheoretical physicsMathematicsPhysicsEpistemologyQuantum mechanicsMathematical physicsQuantumPhilosophyComputer scienceQuantum gravityQuantum field theory in curved spacetimeEconomicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a new form of retrocausality, which is found in the behavior of a class of causal set theories, called energetic causal sets (ECS). These are discrete sets of events, connected by causal relations. They have three orders: (1) a birth order, which is the order in which events are generated; this is a total order which is the true causal order, (2) a dynamical partial order, which prescribes the flows of energy and momentum among events, (3) an emergent causal order, which is defined by the geometry of an emergent Minkowski spacetime, in which the events of the causal sets are embedded. However, the embedding of the events in the emergent Minkowski spacetime may preserve neither the true causal order in (1) nor correspond completely with the microscopic partial order in (2). We call this disordered causality, and we here demonstrate its occurrence in specific ECS models. This is the second in a series of papers centered around the question: should we accept violations of causality as a lesser price to pay in order to keep realist formulations of quantum theory? We begin to address this in the first paper [E. Cohen, M. Cort\^es, A. C. Elitzur, and L. Smolin, preceding paper, Realism and causality. I. Pilot wave and retrocausal models as possible facilitators, Phys. Rev. D 102, 124027 (2020).] and continue here by giving an explicit example of an ECS model in the classical regime, in which causality is disordered.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.385 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicQuantum Mechanics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207