Topic for 2018 Int’l Workshop on Quantum Foundations

I would like to discuss the Relativistic Transactional Interpretation, specifically the explicit derivation of the Born Rule for radiative processes as presented in my recent paper with John Cramer (

It appears clear that TI and RTI provide a physical account of measurement as well as a physical derivation of the Born Rule. Previous objections to TI (such as that of Maudlin) have been unambiguously resolved and/or nullified (e.g., Thus, TI is still perfectly viable and provides long-sought solutions to pressing problems in quantum theory regarding the need for a physically grounded definition of ‘measurement’ and the source of the Born Rule (as well as a solution to the consistency problems for QFT as reflected in Haag’s theorem, Curiously, however, TI is still not generally recognized as among the ‘mainstream’ approaches. I look forward to discussing with other IJQF members why that might be. Is it the apparent “action at a distance” of the direct-action theory that is off-putting? Is it because both Wheeler and Feynman abandoned their theory (though Wheeler was later advocating it again in 2003)? Comments welcome.

Article written by

Avatar of Ruth Kastner

Please comment with your real name using good manners.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.