"Fine-Tuned", "Unfaithful", "Unnatural": Abuse of Terminology in Causal Modeling
Talkat Quantum Physics and Statistical Causal Models (Simons Institute workshop, 2022) · 2022-04-27..04-29
summary
Argues that causal‑model jargon like fine‑tuned / unfaithful / unnatural is being abused when applied to real quantum theories, using the three‑particle GHZ setup with 100% deterministic odd/even predictions to show Bell‑type nonlocality without statistics. Presents Bohmian mechanics’ ontology and the guidance equation (particles + Schrödinger evolution) to show clear nonlocal causal arrows, and calls the claim of pathological fine‑tuning a rhetorical trick, not a problem with the theory.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (26)
- 0:00Intro
- 0:57Prologue
- 1:55The (Tentative) Plan
- 3:22Problematic Terminology
- 4:13Classical" vs. "Quantum
- 11:09Hidden Variables
- 12:42Contextual"/"Non-Contextual
- 14:07Realist"/"Realism
- 15:10Not-So-Bad Terminology: "Local"
- 16:39The Basic Idea
- 19:46Bell's Theorem
- 21:49The Bell/CHSH DAG
- 22:45GHZ (Greenburger, Horne and Zeilinger)
- 26:29The Quantum Predictions
- 28:19First Conclusion
- 31:52The Situation Graphically
- 35:16How Can the Trick be Done? Bohmian Mechanics
- 36:20The Bohmian Theory
- 37:16The Dynamics: Quantum State
- 37:40The Dynamics: Particles
- 38:32Single Particle in a Stern-Gerlach Field
- 39:10Particle Flow Lines
- 39:31The Singlet State cf David Albert, Quantum Mechanics and Experience
- 40:52The Causal Diagram
- 42:27For Example....
- 44:46THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!