DOCSLIB.ORG

Causation, Realism, Determinism, and Probability in the Science and Philosophy of Max Born

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Causation, Realism, Determinism, and Probability in the Science and Philosophy of Max Born Durham E-Theses Causation, Realism, Determinism, and Probability in the Science and Philosophy of Max Born BUNCE, THOMAS,GEORGE How to cite: BUNCE, THOMAS,GEORGE (2018) Causation, Realism, Determinism, and Probability in the Science and Philosophy of Max Born, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/12697/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 1 Thomas George Bunce Causation, Realism, Determinism, and Probability in the Science and Philosophy of Max Born Abstract In this thesis I will examine the philosophy of the physicist Max Born (1882-1970). As well as his scientific work, Born wrote on a number of philosophical topics: causation, realism, determinism, and probability. They appear as an interest throughout his career, but he particularly concentrates on them from the 1940s onwards. Born is a significant figure in the development of quantum mechanics whose philosophical work has been left largely unexamined. It is the aim of this thesis to elucidate and to critically examine that work. I will give a defence of presentist historiography in the history and philosophy of science and a (relatively) brief biography of Born. With regards to causation, the thesis will argue that he holds that there exist principles regarding causal relations that have guided the development of physics and have, in the modern formulation of the subject, been confirmed as having an empirical status. I will argue that he is a selective realist, initially with regards to invariant properties and, later on, a structural realist. With regards to determinism, I will argue that Born has produced an argument, compatible with modern philosophical definitions of determinism, that we were never entitled to conclude from the success of classical mechanics that the world was deterministic. Finally, I will argue that Born holds an objective interpretation of probabilities in quantum mechanics which, due to his strong belief in the physical reality of quantum- mechanical probabilities and his apparent disbelief in the superposition of the wave- function, is most likely a long-run propensity theory. 2 Causation, Realism, Determinism, and Probability in the Science and Philosophy of Max Born Thomas George Bunce Submitted for the qualification of PhD in Philosophy Department of Philosophy Durham University 2017 Table of Contents Acknowledgements...........................................................................................................4 Introduction.......................................................................................................................5 Chapter 1—Historiographical Prolegomenon...................................................................8 1 Introduction..................................................................................................................8 2 Problems for Presentism.............................................................................................10 2.1 Whig History.......................................................................................................10 2.2 Triumphalism......................................................................................................13 2.3 Presentism, Causation and Diachronic History..................................................14 2.4 Presentism Defended..........................................................................................18 3 An Example From Alchemy.......................................................................................21 3.1 Newman..............................................................................................................21 3.2 Ursula Klein........................................................................................................23 4 The Historiography of Scientific Biography...............................................................25 4.1 David Brewster and the ‘Memoirs of Isaac Newton’.........................................27 4.1.1 The High Priest of Science—Newton as a Religious Figure......................31 4.2 Louis Trenchard More and ‘Isaac Newton: A Biography’..................................33 4.3 Frank E Manuel and ‘A Portrait of Isaac Newton’.............................................35 5 Conclusion..................................................................................................................37 Chapter 2: The Born Identity...........................................................................................41 1 Introduction................................................................................................................41 1.1 The Biographies..................................................................................................42 2 Early Life....................................................................................................................43 3 University—Breslau, Heidelberg, Zurich and Göttingen...........................................46 4 Doctoral Thesis...........................................................................................................54 5 Habilation and Lectureships in Göttingen and Berlin................................................58 6 Back to Göttingen; Quantum Mechanics....................................................................62 7 Leaving Germany; South Tyrol; Cambridge; and Edinburgh.....................................69 3 8 Retirement From Edinburgh and Later Life; Nobel Prize; Pugwash.........................71 Chapter 3: Born on Causation.........................................................................................75 1 Introduction................................................................................................................75 2 Born's Causal Principles.............................................................................................76 3 The Causal Principles in the Development of Physics...............................................79 3.1 Contiguity...........................................................................................................79 3.1.1 Contact Forces.............................................................................................82 3.1.2 Electromagnetic Fields................................................................................84 3.1.3 Relativity.....................................................................................................85 3.2 Antecedence........................................................................................................86 3.2.1 Antecedence in Newtonian Mechanics.......................................................86 3.2.2 Antecedence in Thermodynamics...............................................................89 3.2.3 Antecedence in Quantum Mechanics..........................................................97 4 What is Born after?...................................................................................................100 4.1 Principles in Physics: A Zoo.............................................................................102 4.1.1 Kantian Synthetic A Priori Principles.......................................................102 4.1.2 Chang's Ontological Principles.................................................................105 4.1.3 Meyerson’s Principles of Identity (via way of Eli Zahar).........................110 4.1.4 Influential Metaphysics.............................................................................112 4.1.5 Zahar on Metaphysical Principles and Heuristic Superiority....................116 4.2 What is the Status of the Principles?.................................................................119 5 Does Physics Actually Respect Contiguity and Antecedence?................................123 5.1.1 Spooky Action at a Distance.....................................................................123 5.1.2 Relativistic Time Travel?..........................................................................124 5.1.3 Should Born Have Considered Relativistic Time-Travel?........................126 6 Conclusion................................................................................................................128 Chapter 4—Born on Scientific Realism........................................................................129 1 Introduction..............................................................................................................129 2 Born, Positivism and Invariant Realism...................................................................130 2.1 Dingle................................................................................................................130 2.2 ‘Physical Reality’..............................................................................................133
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 100 Jahre Physik in Frankfurt Am Main in Der Reihenfolge Ihrer Tätigkeit an Der Universität
    INHALTSVERZEICHNIS 5 100 Jahre Physik in Frankfurt am Main in der Reihenfolge ihrer Tätigkeit an der Universität Einleitung von Klaus Bethge und Claudia Freudenberger 9 Zum Fachbereich Physik von Wolf Aßtnus 17 1907- 1927 Martin Brendel (1862 - 1939) von Wilhelm H. Kegel 21 1908-1932 Richard Wachsmuth (1868 - 1941) von Walter Saltzer 36 1914-1917 Max von Laue (1879 - 1960) von Friedrich Beck 52 1914-1922 Otto Stern (1888 - 1969) von Immanuel Estermann 76 1919-1921 Max Born (1882 - 1970) von Friedrich Hund 91 1914-1922 Alfred Lande (1888 - 1976) von Azim O. Barut 120 1920- 1925 Walther Gerlach (1889 - 1979) von Helmut Rechenberg 131 1921 - 1949 Erwin Madelung (1881 - 1972) von Ulrich E. Schröder 152 1921 - 1934 und 1953 - 1963 Friedrich Dessauer (1881 - 1963) von Wolfgang Pohlit 168 http://d-nb.info/105995575X 6 PHYSIKER AN DER GOETHE-UNIVERSITÄT 1924 - 1933 Cornelius Lanczos (1893 - 1974) von Helmut Rechenberg 194 1925 - 1937 Karl Wilhelm Meissner (1891 - 1959) von Jörg Kummer 208 1928 - 1933 Hans Albrecht Bethe (1906 - 2005) von Horst Schmidt-Böcking 221 1932- 1951 Max Seddig (1877 - 1963) von Günter Haase 242 1934- 1966 Boris Rajewsky (1893 - 1974) von Erwin Schopper 252 1938 - 1961 Marianus Czerny (1896 - 1985) von Helmut A. Müser 275 1940 - 1970 Willy Hartner (1905 - 1981) von Matthias Schramm 315 1937 - 1945 Wolfgang Gentner (1906 - 1980) von Ulrich Schmidt-Rohr 332 1951 - 1972 Hermann Dänzer (1904 - 1987) von Jörg Kummer 350 1946- 1973 Bernhard Mrowka (1907 - 1973) von Dieter Langbein 361 1958 - 1977 Wolfgang Gleißberg (1903 - 1986) von Wilhelm H. Kegel 371 1960-1981 Rainer Bass (1930 - 1981) von Klaus Bethge 382 INHALTSVERZEICHNIS 7 1964- 1969 Heinz Bilz (1926 - 1986) von Ulrich Schröder 391 1951 - 1956 Friedrich Hund (1896 - 1997) von Ulrich E.
    [Show full text]
  • Summer 2017 Astron 9 Week 5 Final Version
    RELATIVITY OF SPACE AND TIME IN POPULAR SCIENCE RICHARD ANANTUA PREDESTINATION (MON JUL 31) REVIEW OF JUL 24, 26 & 28 • Flying atomic clocks, muon decay, light bending around stars and gravitational waves provide experimental confirmation of relativity • In 1919, Einstein’s prediction for the deflection of starlight was confirmed by • The 1971 Hafele-Keating experiment confirmed • The 1977 CERN muon experiment confirmed • In 2016 LIGO confirmed the existence of REVIEW OF JUL 24, 26 & 28 • Flying atomic clocks, muon decay, light bending around stars and gravitational waves provide experimental confirmation of relativity • In 1919, Einstein’s prediction for the deflection of starlight was confirmed by Sir Arthur Eddington • The 1971 Hafele-Keating experiment confirmed motional and gravitational time dilation • The 1977 CERN muon experiment confirmed motional time dilation • In 2016 LIGO confirmed the existence of gravitational waves TIME TRAVEL IN RELATIVITY • Methods of time travel theoretically possible in relativity are • (Apparently) faster than light travel – window into the past? • Closed timelike curved • (Apparent) paradoxes with time travel • Kill your grandfather – past time travel may alter seemingly necessary conditions for the future time traveler to have started the journey • Predestination - apparent cause of past event is in the future SPECIAL RELATIVISTIC VELOCITY ADDITION • In special relativity, no object or information can travel faster than light, a fact reflected in the relativistic law of composition of velocities v &v vAB v = $% %' A !" v$%v%' (& * ) vBC B C • vAB is the (1D) velocity of A with respect to B • vBC is the (1D) velocity of B with respect to C POP QUIZ - FASTER THAN LIGHT TRAVEL • A spaceship traveling at v>c is returning from a moving planet (L0 away right before the journey).
    [Show full text]
  • Closed Timelike Curves Make Quantum and Classical Computing Equivalent
    Closed Timelike Curves Make Quantum and Classical Computing Equivalent Scott Aaronson∗ John Watrous† MIT University of Waterloo Abstract While closed timelike curves (CTCs) are not known to exist, studying their consequences has led to nontrivial insights in general relativity, quantum information, and other areas. In this paper we show that if CTCs existed, then quantum computers would be no more powerful than classical computers: both would have the (extremely large) power of the complexity class PSPACE, consisting of all problems solvable by a conventional computer using a polynomial amount of memory. This solves an open problem proposed by one of us in 2005, and gives an essentially complete understanding of computational complexity in the presence of CTCs. Following the work of Deutsch, we treat a CTC as simply a region of spacetime where a “causal consistency” condition is imposed, meaning that Nature has to produce a (probabilistic or quantum) fixed-point of some evolution operator. Our conclusion is then a consequence of the following theorem: given any quantum circuit (not necessarily unitary), a fixed-point of the circuit can be (implicitly) computed in polynomial space. This theorem might have independent applications in quantum information. 1 Introduction The possibility of closed timelike curves (CTCs) within general relativity and quantum gravity theories has been studied for almost a century [11, 15, 13]. A different line of research has sought to understand the implications of CTCs, supposing they existed, for quantum mechanics, computation, and information [9, 8, 5]. In this paper we contribute to the latter topic, by giving the first complete characterization of the computational power of CTCs.
    [Show full text]
  • Sterns Lebensdaten Und Chronologie Seines Wirkens
    Sterns Lebensdaten und Chronologie seines Wirkens Diese Chronologie von Otto Sterns Wirken basiert auf folgenden Quellen: 1. Otto Sterns selbst verfassten Lebensläufen, 2. Sterns Briefen und Sterns Publikationen, 3. Sterns Reisepässen 4. Sterns Züricher Interview 1961 5. Dokumenten der Hochschularchive (17.2.1888 bis 17.8.1969) 1888 Geb. 17.2.1888 als Otto Stern in Sohrau/Oberschlesien In allen Lebensläufen und Dokumenten findet man immer nur den VornamenOt- to. Im polizeilichen Führungszeugnis ausgestellt am 12.7.1912 vom königlichen Polizeipräsidium Abt. IV in Breslau wird bei Stern ebenfalls nur der Vorname Otto erwähnt. Nur im Emeritierungsdokument des Carnegie Institutes of Tech- nology wird ein zweiter Vorname Otto M. Stern erwähnt. Vater: Mühlenbesitzer Oskar Stern (*1850–1919) und Mutter Eugenie Stern geb. Rosenthal (*1863–1907) Nach Angabe von Diana Templeton-Killan, der Enkeltochter von Berta Kamm und somit Großnichte von Otto Stern (E-Mail vom 3.12.2015 an Horst Schmidt- Böcking) war Ottos Großvater Abraham Stern. Abraham hatte 5 Kinder mit seiner ersten Frau Nanni Freund. Nanni starb kurz nach der Geburt des fünften Kindes. Bald danach heiratete Abraham Berta Ben- der, mit der er 6 weitere Kinder hatte. Ottos Vater Oskar war das dritte Kind von Berta. Abraham und Nannis erstes Kind war Heinrich Stern (1833–1908). Heinrich hatte 4 Kinder. Das erste Kind war Richard Stern (1865–1911), der Toni Asch © Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland 2018 325 H. Schmidt-Böcking, A. Templeton, W. Trageser (Hrsg.), Otto Sterns gesammelte Briefe – Band 1, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-55735-8 326 Sterns Lebensdaten und Chronologie seines Wirkens heiratete.
    [Show full text]
  • Light Rays, Singularities, and All That
    Light Rays, Singularities, and All That Edward Witten School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study Einstein Drive, Princeton, NJ 08540 USA Abstract This article is an introduction to causal properties of General Relativity. Topics include the Raychaudhuri equation, singularity theorems of Penrose and Hawking, the black hole area theorem, topological censorship, and the Gao-Wald theorem. The article is based on lectures at the 2018 summer program Prospects in Theoretical Physics at the Institute for Advanced Study, and also at the 2020 New Zealand Mathematical Research Institute summer school in Nelson, New Zealand. Contents 1 Introduction 3 2 Causal Paths 4 3 Globally Hyperbolic Spacetimes 11 3.1 Definition . 11 3.2 Some Properties of Globally Hyperbolic Spacetimes . 15 3.3 More On Compactness . 18 3.4 Cauchy Horizons . 21 3.5 Causality Conditions . 23 3.6 Maximal Extensions . 24 4 Geodesics and Focal Points 25 4.1 The Riemannian Case . 25 4.2 Lorentz Signature Analog . 28 4.3 Raychaudhuri’s Equation . 31 4.4 Hawking’s Big Bang Singularity Theorem . 35 5 Null Geodesics and Penrose’s Theorem 37 5.1 Promptness . 37 5.2 Promptness And Focal Points . 40 5.3 More On The Boundary Of The Future . 46 1 5.4 The Null Raychaudhuri Equation . 47 5.5 Trapped Surfaces . 52 5.6 Penrose’s Theorem . 54 6 Black Holes 58 6.1 Cosmic Censorship . 58 6.2 The Black Hole Region . 60 6.3 The Horizon And Its Generators . 63 7 Some Additional Topics 66 7.1 Topological Censorship . 67 7.2 The Averaged Null Energy Condition .
    [Show full text]
  • Obituary : Walter Greiner
    Obituary : Walter Greiner Walter Greiner, one of the leading theoretical physicists of after-war Germany, who taught and conducted research at Johann-Wolfgang Goethe University in Frankfurt am Main for five decades, died October 5, 2016, at his home in Kelkheim, near Frankfurt. He was born on 29 October 1935 in Neuenbau, Land of Thüringen. He studied Physics in Frankfurt and Darmstadt, and earned the doctoral degree in 1961 from the University of Freiburg, with a thesis entitled “The nuclear polarization in μ-mesoatoms”, under the supervision of Hans Marschall, a theoretical physicist, former assistant of Siegfried Flügge in Göttingen and co-author of the famous book on Quantum Mechanics “Rechenmethoden der Quantentheorie”. In 1983 Walter Greiner recalled that the well-known Rotation-Vibration model of nuclei, proposed by him and A. Faessler, appeared under the influence of H. Marschall. Between 1962-1964 W.G. was Assistant Professor at the University of Maryland. In 1965 he obtained the position of Ordinarius at the Institute of Theoretical Physics (J.W. Goethe University) where he held the directorship for three decades. Before him this institute was directed by brilliant physicists such as Max von Laue, Max Born, Friedrich Hund and Erwin Madelung. In the '60, Walter Greiner played an instrumental role in the development of Heavy Ion research in the Federal Republic of Germany, an effort that lead to one of the largest facilities of this type in the world: Gesselschaft für Schwerionenforschung (GSI-Darmstadt). In 2003 he retired from the faculty and founded the Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies (FIAS), where he was director for several years.
    [Show full text]
  • Otto Stern Annalen 4.11.11
    (To be published by Annalen der Physik in December 2011) Otto Stern (1888-1969): The founding father of experimental atomic physics J. Peter Toennies,1 Horst Schmidt-Böcking,2 Bretislav Friedrich,3 Julian C.A. Lower2 1Max-Planck-Institut für Dynamik und Selbstorganisation Bunsenstrasse 10, 37073 Göttingen 2Institut für Kernphysik, Goethe Universität Frankfurt Max-von-Laue-Strasse 1, 60438 Frankfurt 3Fritz-Haber-Institut der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft Faradayweg 4-6, 14195 Berlin Keywords History of Science, Atomic Physics, Quantum Physics, Stern- Gerlach experiment, molecular beams, space quantization, magnetic dipole moments of nucleons, diffraction of matter waves, Nobel Prizes, University of Zurich, University of Frankfurt, University of Rostock, University of Hamburg, Carnegie Institute. We review the work and life of Otto Stern who developed the molecular beam technique and with its aid laid the foundations of experimental atomic physics. Among the key results of his research are: the experimental test of the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution of molecular velocities (1920), experimental demonstration of space quantization of angular momentum (1922), diffraction of matter waves comprised of atoms and molecules by crystals (1931) and the determination of the magnetic dipole moments of the proton and deuteron (1933). 1 Introduction Short lists of the pioneers of quantum mechanics featured in textbooks and historical accounts alike typically include the names of Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Arnold Sommerfeld, Niels Bohr, Max von Laue, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, Paul Dirac, Max Born, and Wolfgang Pauli on the theory side, and of Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen, Ernest Rutherford, Arthur Compton, and James Franck on the experimental side. However, the records in the Archive of the Nobel Foundation as well as scientific correspondence, oral-history accounts and scientometric evidence suggest that at least one more name should be added to the list: that of the “experimenting theorist” Otto Stern.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Fluctuations and Thermodynamic Processes in The
    Quantum fluctuations and thermodynamic processes in the presence of closed timelike curves by Tsunefumi Tanaka A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Physics Montana State University © Copyright by Tsunefumi Tanaka (1997) Abstract: A closed timelike curve (CTC) is a closed loop in spacetime whose tangent vector is everywhere timelike. A spacetime which contains CTC’s will allow time travel. One of these spacetimes is Grant space. It can be constructed from Minkowski space by imposing periodic boundary conditions in spatial directions and making the boundaries move toward each other. If Hawking’s chronology protection conjecture is correct, there must be a physical mechanism preventing the formation of CTC’s. Currently the most promising candidate for the chronology protection mechanism is the back reaction of the metric to quantum vacuum fluctuations. In this thesis the quantum fluctuations for a massive scalar field, a self-interacting field, and for a field at nonzero temperature are calculated in Grant space. The stress-energy tensor is found to remain finite everywhere in Grant space for the massive scalar field with sufficiently large field mass. Otherwise it diverges on chronology horizons like the stress-energy tensor for a massless scalar field. If CTC’s exist they will have profound effects on physical processes. Causality can be protected even in the presence of CTC’s if the self-consistency condition is imposed on all processes. Simple classical thermodynamic processes of a box filled with ideal gas in the presence of CTC’s are studied. If a system of boxes is closed, its state does not change as it travels through a region of spacetime with CTC’s.
    [Show full text]
  • Cosmic String Lensing and Closed Timelike Curves
    PHYSICAL REVIEW D 72, 043532 (2005) Cosmic string lensing and closed timelike curves Benjamin Shlaer* and S.-H. Henry Tye† Laboratory for Elementary Particle Physics, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, USA (Received 3 March 2005; revised manuscript received 21 July 2005; published 31 August 2005) In an analysis of the gravitational lensing by two relativistic cosmic strings, we argue that the formation of closed timelike curves proposed by Gott is unstable in the presence of particles (e.g. the cosmic microwave background radiation). Because of the attractorlike behavior of the closed timelike curve, we argue that this instability is very generic. A single graviton or photon in the vicinity, no matter how soft, is sufficient to bend the strings and prevent the formation of closed timelike curves. We also show that the gravitational lensing due to a moving cosmic string is enhanced by its motion, not suppressed. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.72.043532 PACS numbers: 98.80.Cq, 04.20.Gz, 04.60.Kz, 11.27.+d I. INTRODUCTION strings in the sense opposite to their motion becomes a CTC. This is sometimes called the Gott spacetime or Gott Although cosmic strings as the seed of structure forma- time machine. tion [1] has been ruled out by observations, their presence Although there is no proof that a time machine cannot at a lower level is still possible. Indeed, cosmic strings are exist in our world [13], their puzzling causal nature leads generically present in brane inflation in superstring theory, many physicists to believe that CTCs cannot be formed. and their properties are close to, but within all observatio- This skepticism has been encoded in Hawking’s chronol- nal bounds [2–7].
    [Show full text]
  • Closed Timelike Curves Via Postselection: Theory and Experimental Test of Consistency
    Closed Timelike Curves via Postselection: Theory and Experimental Test of Consistency The MIT Faculty has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters. Citation Lloyd, Seth, et al. "Closed Timelike Curves via Postselection: Theory and Experimental Test of Consistency." American Physical Society, 2011, 106:4, © 2011 The American Physical Society. As Published http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.040403 Publisher American Physical Society Version Final published version Citable link http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/63096 Terms of Use Article is made available in accordance with the publisher's policy and may be subject to US copyright law. Please refer to the publisher's site for terms of use. week ending PRL 106, 040403 (2011) PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS 28 JANUARY 2011 Closed Timelike Curves via Postselection: Theory and Experimental Test of Consistency Seth Lloyd,1 Lorenzo Maccone,1 Raul Garcia-Patron,1 Vittorio Giovannetti,2 Yutaka Shikano,1,3 Stefano Pirandola,1 Lee A. Rozema,4 Ardavan Darabi,4 Yasaman Soudagar,4 Lynden K. Shalm,4 and Aephraim M. Steinberg4 1xQIT, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139-4307, USA 2NEST-CNR-INFM & Scuola Normale Superiore, Piazza dei Cavalieri 7, I-56126, Pisa, Italy 3Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 Oh-Okayama, Meguro, Tokyo, 152-8551, Japan 4CQIQC, IOS, Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A7 (Received 12 May 2010; revised manuscript received 22 November 2010; published 27 January 2011) Closed timelike curves (CTCs) are trajectories in spacetime that effectively travel backwards in time: a test particle following a CTC can interact with its former self in the past.
    [Show full text]
  • Causality Violation and Singularities
    TIT/HEP-302/COSMO-59 October, 1995 Causality violation and singularities Kengo Maeda 1 and Akihiro Ishibashi 2 Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Oh-Okayama Meguro-ku, Tokyo 152, Japan ABSTRACT We show that singularities necessarily occur when a boundary of causality violating set exists in a space-time under the physically suitable assumptions except the global causality condition in the Hawking-Penrose singularity theo- rems. Instead of the global causality condition, we impose some restrictions on the causality violating sets to show the occurrence of singularities. 1 Introduction Space-time singularities have been discussed for a long time in general relativity. In 1970, Hawking and Penrose[1] showed that singularities, which mean causal arXiv:gr-qc/9606075v1 27 Jun 1996 geodesic incompleteness, could occur in a space-time under seemingly reasonable conditions in classical gravity. Their singularity theorem has an important impli- cation that our universe has an initial singularity if we do not consider quantum effects. However, this theorem is physically unsatisfactory in the sense that the causality requirement everywhere in a space-time seems too restrictive. We can only experience local events and there is no guarantee that the causality holds in the entire universe. As is well known, Kerr type black holes have causality violating sets if the space-time is maximally extended. Therefore, it will be im- portant to investigate occurrence of singularities in a space-time in which the global causality condition is violated. There are some works on a causality violation concerned with the occurrence of singularity. Tipler[2,3] showed that any attempt to evolve closed timelike curves from an initial regular Cauchy data would cause singularities to form in a 1e-mail:[email protected] 2e-mail:[email protected] 1 space-time.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:0710.4474V1 [Gr-Qc] 24 Oct 2007 I.“Apdie Pctmsadspruia Travel Superluminal and Spacetimes Drive” “Warp III
    Exotic solutions in General Relativity: Traversable wormholes and “warp drive” spacetimes Francisco S. N. Lobo∗ Centro de Astronomia e Astrof´ısica da Universidade de Lisboa, Campo Grande, Ed. C8 1749-016 Lisboa, Portugal and Institute of Gravitation & Cosmology, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth PO1 2EG, UK (Dated: February 2, 2008) The General Theory of Relativity has been an extremely successful theory, with a well established experimental footing, at least for weak gravitational fields. Its predictions range from the existence of black holes, gravitational radiation to the cosmological models, predicting a primordial beginning, namely the big-bang. All these solutions have been obtained by first considering a plausible distri- bution of matter, i.e., a plausible stress-energy tensor, and through the Einstein field equation, the spacetime metric of the geometry is determined. However, one may solve the Einstein field equa- tion in the reverse direction, namely, one first considers an interesting and exotic spacetime metric, then finds the matter source responsible for the respective geometry. In this manner, it was found that some of these solutions possess a peculiar property, namely “exotic matter,” involving a stress- energy tensor that violates the null energy condition. These geometries also allow closed timelike curves, with the respective causality violations. Another interesting feature of these spacetimes is that they allow “effective” superluminal travel, although, locally, the speed of light is not surpassed. These solutions are primarily useful as “gedanken-experiments” and as a theoretician’s probe of the foundations of general relativity, and include traversable wormholes and superluminal “warp drive” spacetimes. Thus, one may be tempted to denote these geometries as “exotic” solutions of the Einstein field equation, as they violate the energy conditions and generate closed timelike curves.
    [Show full text]