Time symmetry and the Einstein paradox

See, for example, M. A. Horne: Ph. D. Thesis, Boston University (1970) (mimeographed).

S. J. Freedman and J. F. Clauser:Phys. Rev. Lett., 28, 938 (1972); J. F. Clauser:Phys. Rev. Lett. 36, 1223 (1976); E. Fry and R. C. Thompson:Phys. Rev. Lett.,37, 465 (1976).

L. de Broglie:Une tentative d'interprétation causale et non linéaire de la mécanique ondulatoire, Chap. 12 (Paris, 1956), p. 73.

Paradox: A very surprising, but perhaps true statement (Sense No. 1 in all dictionaries). Copernicus' heliocentrism has been a paradox.

Paradox and Paradigm, edited by R. G. Colodny (Pittsburgh, Pa., 1973).

A. Einstein: inRapports et Discussions du V Conseil Solvay (Paris, 1928), p. 253.

A. Einstein, B. Podolsky and N. Rosen:Phys. Rev., 47, 777 (1935).

A. Einstein inA. Einstein, Philosopher Scientist, edited by P. A. Schilpp (Evanston, Ill.. 1949), p. 85, 683.

E. Schrödinger:Naturwiss., 23, 844 (1935), see p. 845.

M. Renninger:Physik, 158, 417 (1960);Phys. Zeits.,136, 251 (1963).

H. Mehlberg: inCurrent Issues in the Philosophy of Seience, edited by H. Feigl and G. Maxwell (New York, N.Y., 1961).

O. Costa de Beauregard:Compt. Rend., 236, 1632 (1953);Rev. Interu. Philos., 61–62, 1 (1962);Dialectica, 19, 280 (1965); inProceedings o] the International Conjerence on Thermodynamics, edited by P. T. LANDSBERG (London, 1970), p. 539.

H. P. Stapp:Nuovo Cimento, 29B, 270 (1975).

J. S. Bell:Epist. Lett., 9, 11 (1976).

W. C. Davidon:Nuovo Cimento, 36 B, 34 (1976).

See footnote (13) in J. F. Clauser and M. A. Horne:Phys. Rev. D, 10, 526 (1974).

D. Bohm and H. Aharonov:Phys. Rev., 108, 1070 (1957).

P. A. M. DIRAC:The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, 3rd Edition (Oxford, 1947).

A. LANDE:New Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Cambridge, 1965). A controversial, but suggestive book.

For an overall view and a guide in the literature of the subject, see O. COSTA DE BEAUREGARD:Proceedings of the International Congress for Logic, Method and Philosophy of Science, edited by Y. BAR HILLEL (Amsterdam, 1964), p. 313, orStudium Generale, 24, 10 (1971).

See, for instance, F. LONDON and E. BAUER:La théorie de l'observation en mécanique quantique (Paris, 1939); P. A. Moldauer:Phys. Rev. D, 5, 1028 (1972); F. J. BELINFANTE:Measurements and Time Reversal in Objective Quantum Theory (Oxford, 1975), p. 26.

A. Garuccio and F. Selleri:Nuovo Cimento, 36B, 176 (1976).

D. Bohm and Y. Aharonov:Phys. Rev., 108, 1070 (1957).

A. Aspect:Phys. Lett., 54A, 117 (1975);Phys. Rev. D, 14, 1944 (1976).

O. Costa de Beauregard:Found. Phys., 6, 539 (1976);Synthese,35, 129 (1977).

J. Hall, C. Kim, B.McElroy and A. Shimony:Found. Phys. (in press).

O. Costa de Beaurgard:Cah. Phys., 12, 317 (1958). See also ref. (20).

O. COSTA DE BEAUREGARD:Précis de mécanique quantique relativiste (Paris, 1967).

J. Schwinger:Phys. Rev., 74, 1439 (1948), p. 1451.

H. Umezawa and A. Visconti:Natl. Phys., 1, 20 (1956).

J. M. Jauch and F. Rohrlich:The Theory of Photons and Electrons (Cambridge, Mass., 1955).

One need not say that this approach to the position measurement problem differs essentially from the one leading to the various definitions of the position operator of a spinning particle. No attempt is made to discuss the relation (if any) between these approaches. Also, for brevity in discourse and notation, the photon has been given a (very small) rest mass.

R. P. Feynman:Phys. Rev., 76, 749 (1949), see especially p. 749.

O. Costa de Beauregard:Compt. Rend., 283A, 1003 (1976);Phys. Lett., 60A, 93 (1977). Being expressed in the rest frame of the electron-positron pair, this approach is not directly applicable to the various experimental tests of the Einstein paradox using electron-positron annihilation.

It is, of course,PC invariant, as most easily seen by exchanging the convention in which the e− has positive and the e+ negative energy against the opposite one.

We quote for instance B. D'Espagnat:Phys. Rev. D, 11, 1424 (1975) as one of the later papers, and one containing m~ny references to the literature.

J. von Neumann:Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Princeton, N. J., 1955).

For a recent experimental proof see A. R. Wilson, J. Lowe and D. K. Butt:J. Phys. G, 2, 613 (1976).

R. L. Pflegor and L. Mandel:Phys. Rev., 159, 1084 (1967);Journ. Opt. Soc. Amer.,58, 946 (1968).