Is Einstein’s Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics Ψ-Epistemic?
- 58 Downloads
Harrigan and Spekkens (Found Phys 40:125–157, 2010), introduced the influential notion of an ontological model of operational quantum theory. Ontological models can be either “epistemic” or “ontic.” According to the two scholars, Einstein would have been one of the first to propose an epistemic interpretation of quantum mechanics. Pusey et al. (Nat Phys 8:475–478, 2012) showed that an epistemic interpretation of quantum theory is impossible, so implying that Einstein had been refuted. We discuss in detail Einstein’s arguments against the standard interpretation of QM, proving that there is a misunderstanding in Harrigan and Spekkens’ attribution of an epistemic perspective to Einstein, whose point of view was actually statistical, but in a quasi-classical sense.
KeywordsEinstein Harrigan and Spekkens Incompleteness Pusey, Barrett and Rudolph Quantum state
We thank Claudio Calosi, who discussed with us the topic of the paper.
- Albert D, Ney A (eds) (2013) The wave function. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Bacciagaluppi G, Crull E (2018) The Einstein paradox: the debate on nonlocality and incompleteness in 1935. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Brown H (2016) The reality of the quantum state. New arguments and old, lecture at XII ontology international congress, DonostiaGoogle Scholar
- Cushing JT, McMullin E (eds) (1989) Philosophical consequences of quantum theory: reflections on Bell’s theorem. University of Notre Dame Press, Notre DameGoogle Scholar
- Einstein A (1948) Quanten-Mechanik und Wirklichkeit. dialectica 2: 320–324. Translated in English in: Born M, Einstein A (1971) The Born-Einstein letters. Correspondence between Albert Einstein and Max and Hedwig Born from 1916 to 1955. Macmillan, London, pp 168–173Google Scholar
- Einstein A (1949) Autobiographical notes. In: Schilpp PA (ed) Albert Einstein. Philosopher-scientist. MJF Books, New York, pp 1–95Google Scholar
- Fuchs CA (2010) QBism, the perimeter of quantum Bayesianism. https://arxiv.org/abs/1003.5209
- Fuchs CA, Schack R (2015) QBism and the Greek: why a quantum state does not represent an element of physical reality. https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.4211
- Home D, Whittaker A (2007) Einstein’s struggle with quantum theory. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Howard D (2015) Anche Einstein gioca a dadi. Carocci, RomaGoogle Scholar
- Jammer M (1974) The philosophy of quantum mechanics: the interpretation of quantum mechanics in historical perspective. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Lange M (2002) An introduction to the philosophy of physics. Wiley, MaldenGoogle Scholar
- Schlosshauer M (2007) Decoherence and the quantum-classical transition. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar