Quantisation, Representation and Reduction; How Should We Interpret the Quantum Hamiltonian Constraints of Canonical Gravity?

Abstract

Hamiltonian constraints feature in the canonical formulation of general relativity. Unlike typical constraints they cannot be associated with a reduction procedure leading to a non-trivial reduced phase space and this means the physical interpretation of their quantum analogues is ambiguous. In particular, can we assume that “quantisation commutes with reduction” and treat the promotion of these constraints to operators annihilating the wave function, according to a Dirac type procedure, as leading to a Hilbert space equivalent to that reached by quantisation of the problematic reduced space? If not, how should we interpret Hamiltonian constraints quantum mechanically? And on what basis do we assert that quantisation and reduction commute anyway? These questions will be refined and explored in the context of modern approaches to the quantisation of canonical general relativity.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Symplectic Reduction and the Problem of Time in Nonrelativistic Mechanics.Karim P. Y. Thébault - 2012 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 63 (4):789-824.
Obstacles on the way towards the quantisation of space, time and matter - and possible resolutions.G. Hooft - 2001 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 32 (2):157-180.
Holism and structuralism in classical and quantum general relativity.Mauro Dorato & Massimo Pauri - 2006 - In Dean Rickles, Steven French & Juha Saatsi (eds.), The Structural Foundations of Quantum Gravity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 121-151.
Quantising on a Category.C. J. Isham - 2005 - Foundations of Physics 35 (2):271-297.
Quantum Gravity.Carlo Rovelli - 2007 - Cambridge University Press.
Symmetry and Evolution in Quantum Gravity.Sean Gryb & Karim Thébaault - 2014 - Foundations of Physics 44 (3):305-348.
Pre-socratic quantum gravity.Gordon Belot & John Earman - 2001 - In Craig Callender & Nick Huggett (eds.), Physics Meets Philosophy at the Planck Scale. Cambridge University Press. pp. 213--55.
Why general relativity does need an interpretation.Gordon Belot - 1996 - Philosophy of Science 63 (3):88.
Canonical Proper-Time Dirac Theory.Tepper L. Gill - 1998 - Foundations of Physics 28 (10):1561-1575.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-12-18

Downloads
43 (#351,093)

6 months
13 (#161,691)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Karim Thebault
University of Bristol

Citations of this work

The Role of Time in Relational Quantum Theories.Sean Gryb & Karim Thébault - 2012 - Foundations of Physics 42 (9):1210-1238.
Symplectic Reduction and the Problem of Time in Nonrelativistic Mechanics.Karim P. Y. Thébault - 2012 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 63 (4):789-824.
Three denials of time in the interpretation of canonical gravity.Karim P. Y. Thébault - 2012 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 43 (4):277-294.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The representation of time and change in mechanics.Gordon Belot - 2005 - In John Earman & Jeremy Butterfield (eds.), Philosophy of Physics. Elsevier. pp. 133--227.

Add more references