To quote from here:
Fredkin has suggested [here] that CPT symmetry is an immediate consequence of T symmetry - i.e. that inverting T has as its consequence inverting the parity and charge of all particles.
...for the reason to think that it is T symmetry, not CPT symmetry that holds.
Charge and Parity are likely to be implemented using internal rotation or sequences - and so will reverse automatically if T=>-T. We don't have to manually reverse particle momenta or spin if we are running things backwards. That happens automatically. The idea is that Charge and Parity function like that too - due to how these phenomena work. For instance, Charge seems likely to be implemented rather like a bi-directional pump. Reverse time, and such a pump runs backwards automatically. You do not have to go around reversing all the charges - they reverse themselves automatically. It works like spin does - and reverses automatically for much the same reason.
T-symmetry is neater and simpler. We should prefer it - unless there are good reasons not to do so.
that CPT symmetry is an immediate consequence of T symmetry
If so, then how can T symmetry hold? You seem to be saying that T symmetry implies CPT symmetry. But we know from experiment that CP symmetry is broken. If T symmetry holds, and CP symmetry does not hold, then CPT symmetry cannot hold.
Really, this looks pretty straightforward. The theory you quote has A->B. Experiment !B. Consequently, either !A or !(A->B).
Charge and Parity are likely to be implemented using internal rotation or sequences
Why do you think so?
...We don't have to manual
http://lifeboat.com/blog/2011/06/dear-dr-hawking
Hey guys, my quantum physics is not powerful enough to understand this guy... Can anyone help me out with this one?
Thanks LW