Abstract
Should we doubt the exactness of the predictive quantum rules of calculation? Although this question is sometimes raised in connection with the one on how to physically understand quantum mechanics, these two questions should not be mixed up. It is recalled here that even the first one is stil an object of controversy, and it is shown (a) that in one specific case the arguments put forward in support of such doubts are hardly cogent but (b) that, nevertheless, at least in one specific other context, the question is worth attention. This is the problem of repeated imperfect measurements. Relative to it, a theoretical possibility is shown of discriminating between the thesis that the quantum rules are exact and a powerful theory of which it is proved that it cannot be reconciled with the assumption.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
T. W. Marshall,Nature 313, 438 (1985).
B. d'Espagnat,Phys. Rep. 110, 203 (1984).
A. Aspect, P. Grangier, and G. Roger,Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 91 (1982).
T. W. Marshall, E. Santos, and F. Selleri,Phys. Lett. A 98, 5 (1983).
A. Barchielli, L. Lanz, and G. M. Prosperi,Nuovo Cimento B 72, 79 (1982).
C. M. Caves, K. S. Thorne, R. W. P. Drever, V. O. Sandberg, and M. Zimmermann,Rev. Mod. Phys. 52, 341 (1980).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Paper dedicated to Professor J. A. Wheeler.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
d'Espagnat, B. Are the quantum rules exact? The case of the imperfect measurements. Found Phys 16, 351–360 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01882692
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01882692