Abstract
One of the questions that is haunting the theory of quantum mechanics since its very first beginnings is what the world would be like if this theory were true. And since those beginnings physicists and philosophers have tried to answer this question, which has become known as the question of the interpretation of quantum mechanics. These attempts have led to mixed results. They have generated candidate answers such as the De Broglie-Bohm theory and the consistent histories approach. But they also have led to constraints: the Bell inequalities and the KochenSpecker no-go theorem, for instance, clearly limit what an interpretation of quantum mechanics can offer. Moreover, research has not yet resulted in one generally accepted answer: physicists and philosophers are still divided about the tenability of the De Broglie-Bohm theory, of the consistent histories approach or of any other proposal to interpret quantum mechanics. Hence, the present-day situation is that it is undecided how quantum mechanics should be interpreted. Research is thus still developing and generating new proposals.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Albert, D. Z. and Loewer, B. (1993). Non-ideal measurements. Foundations of Physics Letters, 6: 297–305.
Arntzenius, F. (1998). Curiouser and curiouser: a personal evaluation of modal interpretations. In Dieks, D. and Vermaas, P. E., editors, The Modal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, volume 60 of The Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science, pp. 337–377. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Bacciagaluppi, G. (1995). A Kochen-Specker theorem in the modal interpretation of quantum mechanics. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 34: 1205–1216.
Bacciagaluppi, G. (2002). The Modal Interpretation of Quantum Me-chanics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, forthcoming.
Bacciagaluppi, G. and Dickson, W. M. (1999). Dynamics for modal in-terpretations. Foundations of Physics, 29: 1165–1201.
Bacciagaluppi, G., Donald, M. J., and Vermaas, P. E. (1995). Continuity and discontinuity of definite properties in the modal interpretation. Helvetica Physica Acta, 68: 679–705.
Bacciagaluppi, G. and Hemmo, M. (1996). Modal interpretations, de-coherence and measurements. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 27: 239–277.
Bub, J. (1992). Quantum mechanics without the projection postulate. Foundations of Physics, 22: 737–754.
Bub, J. (1997). Interpreting the Quantum World. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Bub, J. and Clifton, R. K. (1996). A uniqueness theorem for “no collapse” interpretations of quantum mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 27: 181–219.
Bub, J., Clifton, R. K., and Goldstein, S. (2000). Revised proof of the uniqueness theorem for “no collapse” interpretations of quantum mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 31: 95–98.
Clifton, R. K. (1995). Independent motivation of the Kochen-Dieks modal interpretation of quantum mechanics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 46:33–57.
Clifton, R. K. (1996). The properties of modal interpretations of quantum mechanics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 47: 371–398.
Clifton, R. K. (2000). The modal interpretation of algebraic quantum field theory. Physics Letters A, 271: 167–177.
Dickson, W. M. (1998). Quantum Chance and Non-Locality: Probability and Non-Locality in the Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Dickson, W. M. and Clifton, R. K. (1998). Lorentz-invariance in modal interpretations. In Dieks, D. and Vermaas, P. E., editors, The Modal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics,volume 60 of The Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science, pp. 9-47. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Dieks, D. (1988). The formalism of quantum theory: an objective description of reality? Annalen der Physik, 7: 174–190.
Dieks, D. (1998a). Locality and Lorentz-covariance in the modal interpretation of quantum mechanics. In Dieks, D. and Vermaas, P. E., editors, The Modal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, volume 60 of The Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science, pp. 49–67. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Dieks, D. (1998b). Preferred factorizations and consistent property attribution. In Healey, R. A. and Hellman, G., editors, Quantum Measurement: Beyond Paradox, volume 17 of Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of of Science, pp. 144–159. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
Dieks, D. and Vermaas, P. E., editors. (1998). The Modal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, volume 60 of The Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Healey, R. A. (1989). The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics: An Interactive Interpretation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Healey, R. A. and Hellman, G., editors. (1998). Quantum Measurement: Beyond Paradox, volume 17 of Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of of Science. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
Kochen, S. (1995). A new interpretation of quantum mechanics. In Lahti, P. J. and Mittelstead, P., editors, Symposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics, pp. 151–169. World Scientific, Singapore.
Fraassen, B. C. (1972). A formal approach to the philosophy of science. In Colodny, R., editor, Paradigms and Paradoxes: Philosophical Challenges of the Quantum Domain, pp. 303–366. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh.
Fraassen, B. C. (1973). Semantic analysis of quantum logic. In Hooker, C. A., editor, Contemporary Research in the Foundations and Philosophy of Quantum Theory, pp. 80–113. Reidel, Dordrecht.
Fraassen, B. C. (1991). Quantum Mechanics: An Empiricist View. Clarendon, Oxford.
Fraassen, B. C. (1994). Interpretations of science; science as interpretation. In Hilgevoord, J., editor, Physics and Our View of the World, pp. 169–187. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Vermaas, P. E. (1997). A no-go theorem for joint property ascriptions in modal interpretations of quantum mechanics. Physical Review Letters, 78: 2033–2037.
Vermaas, P. E. (1998). Expanding the property ascription in modal interpretations of quantum mechanics. In Healey, R. A. and Hellman, G., editors, Quantum, Measurement: Beyond Paradox, volume 17 of Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, pp. 115–143. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
Vermaas, P. E. (1999). A Philosopher’s Understanding of Quantum Mechanics: Possibilities and Impossibilities of a Modal Interpretation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Vermaas, P. E. and Dieks, D. (1995). The modal interpretation of quantum mechanics and its generalization to density operators. Foundations of Physics, 25: 145–158.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Vermaas, P.E. (2003). Modal Interpretations. In: Rojszczak, A., Cachro, J., Kurczewski, G. (eds) Philosophical Dimensions of Logic and Science. Synthese Library, vol 320. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2612-2_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2612-2_15
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-6432-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-2612-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive