Skip to main content
Log in

How the Natural Interpretation of QM Avoids the Recent No-Go Theorem

  • Published:
Foundations of Physics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A recent no-go theorem gives an extension of the Wigner’s Friend argument that purports to prove the “Quantum theory cannot consistently describe the use of itself.” The argument is complex and thought provoking, but fails in a straightforward way if one treats QM as a statistical theory in the most fundamental sense, i.e. if one applies the so-called ensemble interpretation. This explanation is given here at an undergraduate level, which can be edifying for experts and students alike. A recent paper has already shown that the no-go theorem is incorrect with regard to the de Broglie Bohm theory and misguided in some of its general claims. This paper’s contribution is three fold. It shows how the extended Wigner’s Friend argument fails in the ensemble interpretation. It also makes more evident how natural a consistent statistical treatment of the wave function is. In this way, the refutation of the argument is useful for bringing out the core statistical nature of QM. It, in addition, manifests the unnecessary complications and problems introduced by the collapse mechanism that is part of the Copenhagen interpretation. The paper uses the straightforwardness of the ensemble interpretation to make the no-go argument and its refutation more accessible.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The ensemble interpretation is used to explain the real meaning PBR theorem in Rizzi [7].

  2. For the analysis in the ensemble interpretation see Reference [3].

  3. In our analysis, we do not formally breakout W’s measurement instrument. One can think of the W in our equations as representing the physical state of W’s brain (including all the relevant neurological variables) along with the state of the instrument he uses.

  4. Note, one gets 1/12 whether one allows W to collapse his measured systems or not.

  5. DF&RR discuss, among other interpretations: de Broglie Bohm, many worlds, consistent histories, QBism and ETH approach.

References

  1. Frauchiger, D., Renner, R.: Quantum theory cannot consistently describe the use of itself. Nat. Commun. 9 No. 1038 (2018)

  2. Lazarovici, D., Hubert, M.: How quantum mechanics can consistently describe the use of itself. Sci. Rep. 9 No. 470 (2019)

  3. A. Rizzi, A Simple Approach To Measurement in Quantum Mechanics, to be published

  4. Ballentine, L.E.: Quantum Mechanics: A Modern Development. World Scientific Publishing, Singapore (1998)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Ballentine, L.E.: The statistical interpretation of quantum mechanics. Rev. Mod. Phys. 42(4), 358–381 (1970)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. Rizzi, A.: Physics for Realists: Quantum Mechanics. IAP Press, Baton Rouge (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Rizzi, A.: Does the PBR theorem rule out a statistical understanding of QM?. Found Phys 48(12), 1770–1793 (2018)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. Wigner, Remarks on the Mind-Body Question. In I. J. Good, (ed.) The Scientist Speculates (London: William Heinemann, Ltd., 1961; New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1962), ch. 13, pg 179

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge Doyl Dickel for very helpful conversations during the writing of this article and for his insight-generating comments on the completed article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anthony Rizzi.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rizzi, A. How the Natural Interpretation of QM Avoids the Recent No-Go Theorem. Found Phys 50, 204–215 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-020-00323-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-020-00323-x

Keywords

Navigation