Abstract
The hypotheses of weak and strong objectification of quantum mechanical observables, as well as theoretical arguments and experimental evidence against these hypotheses, are systematically reviewed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
A. Aspect, Ph. Grangier, and G. Roger, “Experimental realization of the Einstein-Podolsky-RosenGedankenexperiment: A new violation of Bell's inequalities,”Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 91–94 (1982).
J. S. Bell, “On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradoxon,”Physics 1, 195–200 (1964).
P. Busch, “Elements of unsharp reality in the EPR experiment,” inSymposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics 1985, P. Lahti and P. Mittelstaedt, eds. (World Scientific, Singapore, 1985), pp. 343–357.
P. Busch, “Macroscopic quantum systems and the objectification problem,” inSymposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics 1990, P. Lahti and P. Mittelstaedt, eds. (World Scientific, Singapore, 1991), pp. 62–76.
P. Busch, P. Lahti, and P. Mittelstaedt,The Quantum Theory of Measurement (Springer, Berlin, 1991) (in press).
P. Busch and F. E. Schroeck, Jr., “On the reality of spin and helicity,”Found. Phys. 19, 807–872 (1989).
A. Fine, “Hidden variables, joint probability, and the Bell inequality,”Phys. Rev. Lett. 48, 291–295 (1982).
P. Mittelstaedt, “On the applicability of the probability concept to quantum theory,” inFoundations of Probability Theory, Statistical Interference, and Statistical Theories of Science, W. I. Harper and C. A. Hooker, eds. Vol. III (Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland, 1976), pp. 155–167.
P. Mittelstaedt,Quantum Logic (Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland, 1978).
P. Mittelstaedt,Philosophische Probleme der Modernen Physik, 7th edn. (BI-Wissenschaftsverlag, Mannheim, 1989).
P. Mittelstaedt, “The objectification in the measuring process and the many-worlds interpretation,” inSymposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics 1990, P. Lahti and P. Mittelstaedt, eds. (World Scientific, Singapore, 1991), pp. 261–279.
G. Möllenstedt and H. Lichte, “Young-Fresnelscher Interferenzversuch...,”Optik 51, 423–428 (1978).
H. Rauch, “Quantum measurements in neutron interferometry,” inFoundations of Quantum Mechanics, M. Namikiet al., eds. (Physical Society of Japan, Tokyo, 1987), pp. 3–17 and the literature quoted there.
E. W. Stachow, “Sequential quantum logic,” inCurrent Issues in Quantum Logic, E. Beltrametti and B. C. van Fraassen, eds. (Plenum, New York, 1981), pp. 173–151.
E. W. Stachow, “Der quantenlogische Wahrscheinlichkeitskalkül,” inGrundlagenprobleme der modernen Physik, J. Nitsch, J. Pfarr, and E. W. Stachow, eds. (B.I.-Wissenschaftsverlag, Mannheim, 1981), pp. 271–305.
E. W. Stachow, “Quantum logical description of microsystems,” inFoundations of Quantum Mechanics, S. Kamefuchiet al., eds. (Physical Society of Japan, Tokyo, 1984), pp. 244–250.
Bas C. van Fraassen, “A modal interpretation of quantum mechanics,” inCurrent Issues in Quantum Logic, E. C. Beltrametti and Bas C. van Fraassen, eds. (Plenum, New York, 1981).
Bas C. van Fraassen, “The modal interpretation of quantum mechanics,” inSymposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics 1990, P. Lahti and P. Mittelstaedt, eds. (World Scientific, Singapore, 1991), pp. 440–460.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Busch, P., Mittelstaedt, P. The problem of objectification in quantum mechanics. Found Phys 21, 889–904 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00733214
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00733214