Towards a separable “empirical reality”?
- 118 Downloads
“To be” or “to be found”? Some contributions relative to this modern variant of Hamlet's question are presented here. They aim at better apprehending the differences between the points of view of the physicists who consider that present-day quantum measurement theories do reach their objective and those who deny they do. It is pointed out that these two groups have different interpretations of the verbs “to be” and “to have” and of the criterion for truth. These differences are made explicit. A notion of “empirical reality” is constructed within the representation of which the physicists of the first named group can consistently uphold their claim. A detailed way of sharpening this definition so as to make empirical reality free of nonlocal actions at a distance is also described.
KeywordsMeasurement Theory Quantum Measurement Modern Variant Empirical Reality Quantum Measurement Theory
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.W. H. Zurek, “Environment-induced superselection rules,”Phys. Rev. D,26, 1862 (1982).Google Scholar
- 2.B. d'Espagnat,Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, 2nd edn. (Addison-Wesley, Redwood City, California, 1976).Google Scholar
- 3.B. d'Espagnat, “Empirical Reality, empirical causality, and the measurement problem,Found. Phys. 17, 507 (1987).Google Scholar
- 4.B. d'Espagnat, inPreludes in Theoretical Physics. In Honour of V. F. Weisskopf, A. De Shalit, H. Feschbach, and L. Van Hove, eds. (North-Holland, Amsterdam 1966), p. 185.Google Scholar
- 5.G. N. Fleming, “Towards a Lorentz-invariant quantum theory of measurement,” invited lecture at theMini-Course and Workshop on Fundamental Physics, held at the Colegio Universitario de Humacao, Universidad de Puerto Rico, 1985.Google Scholar
- 6.M. Gell-Mann and J. B. Hartle, “Quantum mechanics in the light of quantum cosmology,” inProceedings, Third International Symposium on The Foundations of Quantum Mechanics in the Light of New Technology, (Tokyo, Japan, 1989), (Physical Society of Japan, Tokyo, 1990).Google Scholar
- 8.H. Poincaré,La Science et l'hypothèse (Flammarion, Paris, 1914).Google Scholar
- 9.W. H. Zurek, inNew Techniques and Ideas in Quantum Measurement Theory, D. M. Greenberger, ed.,Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sc. 480, 93 (1986).Google Scholar
- 10.M. Bitbol, in E. Schrödinger,L'esprit et la matière, précédé del'Élision par M. Bitbol (Ed. du Seuil, Paris, 1990).Google Scholar
- 11.J. S. Bell, “Against Measurement,” preprint CERN TH 5611/89, 1989;Proceedings, “62 years of uncertainty,” Erice, 5–14 August 1989.Google Scholar
- 12.R. Griffiths,J. Stat. Phys. 36, 219 (1984);Am. J. Phys. 55, 11 (1987).Google Scholar
- 13.R. Omnès,J. Stat. Phys. 53, 893, 933, 957 (1988).Google Scholar
- 14.R. Omnès,J. Stat. Phys., to be published.Google Scholar
- 15.B. d'Espagnat,Phys. Lett. A 124, 204 (1987).Google Scholar
- 16.B. d'Espagnat,J. Stat. Phys. 56, 747 (1989).Google Scholar
- 17.B. d'Espagnat, “Nonseparability and some views on reality,” inProceedings, 13th International Wittgenstein Symposium, Kirchberg/Wechsel (Austria), 14–21 August 1988, Ed. Wittgenstein Gesellschaft, Wien 1989.Google Scholar