Advertisement

Cartwright’s Models are Not Adequate for EPR

  • Jacek Cachro
  • Tomasz Placek
Chapter
Part of the Synthese Library book series (SYLI, volume 320)

Abstract

We assess Cartwright’s models for probabilistic causality, and in particular, her models for EPR-like experiments of quantum mechanics. We show that her models for the EPR are mathematically incorrect and physically implausible. Finally, we argue that her models are not adequate for EPR-phenomena, since they ignore modal and spatiotemporal aspects inherent in their setup.

Keywords

Bell Inequality Causal Story Complete Partition Quantum Mechanical Probability Propositional Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aspect, A., Dalibard, J., and Roger, G. (1982). Experimental test of Bell’s inequalities using time-varying analyzers. Physical Review Letters, 49: 1804–1807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell, J. (1971). Introduction to the hidden-variable question. In Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Proceedings of the International School of Physics “Enrico Fermi”, pp. 171–181. New York. Reprinted in (Bell, 1987 ).Google Scholar
  3. Bell, J. S. (1987). Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  4. Berkovitz, J. (1995). What econometrics cannot teach quantum mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 26 (2): 163–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cachro, J. and Placek, T. (2002). On Carwright’s models for EPR. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 33 (3): 413–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cartwright, N. (1989). Nature’s Capacities and Their Measurement. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  7. Cartwright, N. and Chang, H. (1993). Causality and realism in the EPR, experiment. Erkenntnis, 38: 169–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clauser, J. and Horne, M. (1974). Experimental consequences of objective local theories. Physical Review D, 10: 526–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hofer-Szabo, G., Rédei, M., and Szabó, L. (1999). On Reichenbach’s common cause principle and Reichenbach’s notion of common cause. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 50: 377–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Horwich, P. (1987). Asymmetries in Time. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  11. Jarrett, J. (1984). On the physical significance of the locality conditions in the Bell arguments. Naas, 18: 569–587.Google Scholar
  12. Landau, L. J. (1987). On the violation of Bell’s inequality in quantum theory. Physics Letters A, 120: 54–56.Google Scholar
  13. Mackie, J. (1980). Cement of the Universe. Clarendon Press, Oxford. Maudlin, T. (1993). Book review of Nature’s Capacities and Their Measurement. Journal of Philosophy, 90: 599–603.Google Scholar
  14. Müller, T. and Placek, T. (2001). Against a minimalist reading of Bell’s theorem: lessons from Fine. Synthese, 128: 343–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Placek, T. (2000a). Stochastic outcomes in branching space-time. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 51 (3): 445–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Placek, T. (2000b). Is Nature Deterministic Jagiellonian University Press, Krakow.Google Scholar
  17. Redhead, M. (1987). Incompleteness, Nonlocality and Realism. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  18. Salmon, W. (1975). Theoretical explanation. In Körner, S., editor, Explanation, pp. 118–145. Basil Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  19. Salmon, W. (1984). Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  20. Weihs, G., Jennewein, T., Simon, C., Weinfurter, H., and Zeilinger, A. (1998). Violation of Bell’s inequality under strict Einstein locality conditions. Physical Review Letters, 81: 5039–5043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jacek Cachro
    • 1
  • Tomasz Placek
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Philosophythe Jagiellonian UniversityKrakówPoland

Personalised recommendations