Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Decoherence, relative states, and evolutionary adaptation

  • Published:
Foundations of Physics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We review the decoherent histories approach to the interpretation of quantum mechanics. The Everett relative-state theory is reformulated in terms of decoherent histories. A model of evolutionary adaptation is shown to imply decoherence. A general interpretative framework is proposed: probability and value-definiteness are to have a similar status to the attribution of tense in classical spacetime theory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. B. Davies,Quantum Theory of Open Systems (Academic Press, London, 1976).

    Google Scholar 

  2. E. Joos and H. D. Zeh,Z. Phys. B 59, 223 (1985); W. H. Zurek,Phys. Rev. D 24, 1516 (1981);Phys. Rev. D 26, 1862 (1982); W. G. Unruh and W. H. Zurek,Phys. Rev. D 40, 1071 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  3. R. Griffiths,J. Stat. Phys. 36, 219 (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  4. R. Omnès,Ann. Phys. (N. Y.) 201, 354 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  5. R. Omnès,Rev. Mod. Phys. 64, 339 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  6. M. Gell-Mann and J. B. Hartle, inComplexity, Entropy, and the Physics of Information, W. H. Zurek, ed. (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  7. M. Gell-Mann and J. B. Hartle, inProceedings of the 25th International Conference on High Energy Physics, K. K. Phua and Y. Yamaguchi, eds. (World Scientific, Singapore, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  8. A. Barchielli, L. Lanz, and G. M. Prosperi,Nuovo Cimento B 72, 79 (1982); A. Barchielli and G. Lupierte,J. Math. Phys. 26, 2222 (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  9. N. Gisin,Phys. Rev. Lett. 52 1657 (1984);Helv. Phys. Acta 62 363 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  10. G. Linblad,Commun. Math. Phys. 48, 119 (1976); I. C. Percival, inNATO ASI Series, Vol. 357: Quantum Chaos, Quantum Measurement, P. Cvitanovic, I. C. Percival, and A. Wirzba, eds. (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1992), pp. 199–204.

    Google Scholar 

  11. G. C. Ghirardi, A. Rimini, and T. Weber,Phys. Rev. D 34, 470 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  12. P. Pearle,Phys. Rev. D 13, 857 (1976).

    Google Scholar 

  13. N. Gisin and I. C. Percival,J. Phys. A 25, 5677 (1992);Phys. Let. A 167, 315 (1992); N. Gisin,Phys. Lett. A 143, 1 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  14. K. Hepp,Helv. Phys. Acta 45, 237, (1972); A. Frigerio,Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré A 21, 259 (1976); K. Hannabus,Helv. Phys. Acta 57, 610 (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  15. M. Davis,Int. J. Theor. Phys. 16, 867 (1977); H. Putnam,Erkenntnis 16, 407 (1981); R. Geroch,Noûs 18, 617 (1984); H. Stein,Nôus 18, 635 (1984); D. Deutsch, inQuantum Concepts in Space and Time, R. Penrose and C. Isham, eds. (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  16. H. Everett,Rev. Mod. Phys. 29, 454 (1957).

    Google Scholar 

  17. B. DeWitt and N. Graham,The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1973).

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. McTaggart,The Nature of Existence, Vol. 2 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1927); A. Shimony, “The Transient Now,” inSearch for a Naturalistic World View, Vol. 2 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  19. K. Kuchař, inProceedings of the 4th Canadian Conference on General Relativity and Relativistic Astrophysics (World Scientific, Singapore, 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  20. D. Finkelstein,Trans. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 25, 621 (1963); J. B. Hartle,Am. J. Phys. 36, 704 (1968); W. Ochs,J. Philos. Logic 6, 473 (1977); E. Fahri and J. Goldstone,Ann. Phys. 192, 368 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  21. A. Daneri, A. Loinger, and G. Prosperi,Nucl. Phys. 33, 297 (1962).

    Google Scholar 

  22. W. H. Zurek,Phys. Today 44, No. 10, 36 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  23. R. B. Griffiths,Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 2201 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  24. J. B. Hartle, “Reduction of the State Vector and Limitations on Measurement in the Quantum Mechanics of Closed Systems,” preprint UCSBTH-92-16.

  25. A. O. Caldera and A. J. Legett,Physica A 121, 587 (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  26. A. Kent,Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 5, 1745 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  27. N. Belnap,Synthese 92, 385 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  28. D. Albert and B. Loewer,Synthese 77, 195 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  29. M. Lockwood,Mind, Brain, and Quantum (Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  30. A. Shimony, inThe New Physics, P. Davies, ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  31. L. E. Ballentine,Found. Phys. 3, 229 (1973).

    Google Scholar 

  32. B. DeWitt,Phys. Today 23, No. 9 (1970); reprinted in Ref. 17.

  33. D. Deutsch,Int. J. of Theor. Phys. 24, 1 (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  34. J. Bell, “Quantum Mechanics For Cosmologists,” Note A, Section 5, inSpeakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987); R. Healey,Noûs 18, 591 (1984); B. D'Espagnat,Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, 2nd. ed. (Benjamin, Reading, Massachusetts, 1976).

    Google Scholar 

  35. B. DeWitt, inTopics on Quantum Gravity and Beyond, F. Mansouri and J. J. Scanio, eds. (World Scientific, Singapore, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Y. Aharanov, P. Bergmann, and J. Lebowitz,Phys. Rev. B 134, 1410 (1964).

    Google Scholar 

  37. H. Everett, III, “The theory of the universal wave function,” Ph.D. Dissertation (Princeton, 1957), Part III, Section 2; reprinted in Ref. 17, pp. 46–48; H. D. Zeh, inComplexity, Entropy, and the Physics of Information, W. H. Zurek, ed. (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1990); P. Busch, P. J. Lahti, and P. Mittelstaedt,The Quantum Theory of Measurement (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991); A. Albrecht, “Following a ‘collapsing’ wavefunction,” preprint Fermilab-Pub-92/318-A.

  38. J. Jauch, inProc. Int. School of Physics “Enrico Fermi” 49, B. d'Espagnat, ed. (Academic Press, New York, 1971); S. Kochen, inSymposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics, P. Lahti and P. Mittelstaedt, eds. (World Scientific, Teaneck, New Jersey, 1985); R. Healey,The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics: An Interactive Interpretation (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  39. B. DeWitt, “The many-universes interpretation of quantum mechanics,” Part 1, Section 1, reprinted in Ref. 17.

    Google Scholar 

  40. A. M. Turing,Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London B 237, 37 (1952); J. Maynard Smith,Mathematical Ideas in Biology (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1968); L. G. Harrison, inEntropy, Information, and Evolution, B. H. Weber, D. J. Depew, and J. D. Smith, eds. (MIT Press, Cambridge, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  41. J. B. Hartle, “The quantum mechanics of closed systems,” preprint UCSBTH-92-16.

  42. H. Putnam, “Why there isn't a ready-made world,” inRealism and Reason. Philosophical Papers, Vol. 3 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  43. R. Torretti,Creative Understanding: Philosphical Reflection on Physics (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1990, pp. 271–275).

    Google Scholar 

  44. D. Parfit,Reasons and Persons (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1984).

    Google Scholar 

  45. H. Weyl,Philosophy of Mathematics and Natural Science (Atheneum, New York, 1963), p. 116.

    Google Scholar 

  46. A. Miller, ed.,Sixty-Two Years of Uncertainity (Plenum, New York, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  47. N. Maxwell,Philos. Sci. 52, 23 (1985); H. Stein,Philos. Sci. 58, 147 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  48. N. Graham, in Ref. 17.

    Google Scholar 

  49. W. H. Zurek, “Preferred States, Predictability, Classicality, and the Environment-Induced Decoherence,”The Physical Origins of Time Asymmetry, J. Halliwell, ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  50. M. Gell-Mann and J. B. Hartle,Phys. Rev. D 47, 3345 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy Emerson Hall, Harvard, 02138, Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Simon Saunders

Authors
  1. Simon Saunders
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Comments and suggestions by D. Albert, J. Butterfield, J. Halliwell, H. Putnam, A. Shimony, E. Squires, P. Tappenden, and R. Weingard are gratefully acknowledged. Versions of this material were presented at Rutgers, Budapest, Imperial College, London, Oxford, and Cambridge; I thank the organizers and participants for their hospitality and constructive criticisms.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Saunders, S. Decoherence, relative states, and evolutionary adaptation. Found Phys 23, 1553–1585 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00732365

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00732365

Keywords

Search

Navigation