Dissipating the quantum measurement problem
- Richard Healey
- … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
The integration of recent work on decoherence into a so-called “modal” interpretation offers a promising new approach to the measurement problem in quantum mechanics. In this paper I explain and develop this approach in the context of the interactive interpretation presented in Healey (1989). I begin by questioning a number of assumptions which are standardly made in setting up the measurement problem, and I conclude that no satisfactory solution can afford to ignore the influence of the environment. Further, I argue that there are good reasons to believe that on a “modal” interpretation environmental interactions rapidly ensure that a quantummechanically describable apparatus indeed records a definite result following a measurement interaction.
- Albert, D. and Loewer, B.: 1990, ‘Wanted, dead or alive: two attempts to solve Schrödinger's paradox’, in A. Fine, M. Forbes, and L. Wessels (eds.),PSA 1990, Vol. 1, Philosophy of Science Association, Lansing, Michigan.
- Albert, D. and Loewer, B.: 1993, ‘Non-ideal measurements’,Foundations of Physics Letters 6, 297–305. CrossRef
- Albrecht, A.: 1992, ‘Investigating decoherence in a simple system’,Physical Review D 46, 5504–20. CrossRef
- Albrecht, A.: 1993, ‘Following a “collapsing” wave-function’,Physical Review D 48, 3768–78. CrossRef
- Bacciagaluppi, G. and Hemmo, M.: 1994a, ‘Making sense of approximate decoherence’, forthcoming inPSA 1994, Vol. 1, Philosophy of Science Association, Lansing, Michigan.
- Bacciagaluppi, G. and Hemmo, M.: 1994b, ‘Model interpretations of imperfect measurements’, Cambridge University preprint.
- Bub, J.: 1992, ‘Quantum mechanics without the projection postulate’,Foundations of Physics 22, 737–54. CrossRef
- Caldeira, A. O. and Legett, A. J.: 1985, ‘Influence of damping on quantum interference: an exactly soluble model’,Physical Review A31, 1057–66.
- D'Espagnat, B.: 1976,Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Benjamin, Reading, Mass.
- Dieks, D.: 1989a, ‘Quantum mechanics without the projection postulate and its realistic interpretation’,Foundations of Physics 19, 1397–423. CrossRef
- Dieks, D.: 1989b, ‘Resolution of the measurement problem through decoherence of the quantum state’,Physics Letters A 142, 439–46. CrossRef
- Dieks, D.: 1994a, ‘Objectification, measurement and classical limit according to the modal interpretation of quantum mechanics’, in P. Busch, P. Lahti and P. Mittelstaedt (eds.),Proceedings of the Symposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics, Cologne 1993, World Scientific, Singapore.
- Dieks, D.: 1994b, ‘Modal interpretation of quantum mechanics, measurements, and macroscopic behavior’,Physical Review A 49, 2290–300. CrossRef
- Elby, A.: 1993, ‘Why “modal” interpretations of quantum mechanics don't solve the measurement problem’,Foundations of Physics Letters 6, 5–19. CrossRef
- Elby, A.: 1994, ‘The “decoherence” approach to the measurement problem in quantum mechanics’, forthcoming inPSA 1994, Vol. 1, Philosophy of Science Association, Lansing, Michigan.
- Everett III, H.: 1957, Relative state formulation of quantum mechanics’,Reviews of Modern Physics 29, 454–62. CrossRef
- Gell-Mann, M. and Hartle, J.: (1990), ‘Quantum mechanics in the light of quantum cosmology’, in W. Zurek (ed.),Complexity, Entropy, and the Physics of Information, Addison Wesley, New York, pp. 425–59.
- Griffiths, R.: 1984, ‘Consistent histories and the interpretation of quantum mechanics’,Journal of Statistical Physics 36, 219–72. CrossRef
- Healey, R.: 1989,The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics: an Interactive Interpretation, University Press, Cambridge.
- Healey, R.: 1993a, ‘Why error-prone quantum measurements have outcomes’,Foundations of Physics Letters 6, 37–54. CrossRef
- Healey, R.: 1993b, ‘Measurement and quantum indeterminateness’,Foundations of Physics Letters 6, 307–16. CrossRef
- Joos, E. and Zeh, H. D.: 1985, ‘The emergence of classical properties through interaction with the environment’,Zeitschrift für Physik B59, 223–43.
- Kochen, S.: 1985, ‘A new interpretation of quantum mechanics’, in P. Lahti and P. Mittelstaedt (eds.),Symposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics 1985, World Scientific, Singapore.
- Unruh, W. G. and Zurek, W. H.: 1989, ‘Reduction of a wave-packet in quantum brownian motion’,Physical Review D40, 1071–94.
- Van Fraassen, B.: 1973, ‘A semantic analysis of quantum logic’, in C. A. Hooker (ed.),Contemporary Research in the Foundations and Philosophy of Quantum Theory, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 80–113.
- Van Fraassen, B.: 1991,Quantum Mechanics: an Empiricist View, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
- Wigner, E.: 1963, ‘The problem of measurement’,American Journal of Physics 31, 6–15. CrossRef
- Zurek, W. H.: 1981, ‘Pointer basis of quantum apparatus: into what mixture does the wave packet collapse?’,Physical Review D 24, 1516–25. CrossRef
- Zurek, W. H.: 1982, ‘Environment-induced superselection rules’,Physical Review D 26, 1862–80. CrossRef
- Zurek, W. H.: 1991, ‘Decoherence and the transition from quantum to classical’,Physics Today 44, 36–44. CrossRef
- Zurek, W. H.: 1993a, ‘Preferred states, predictability, classicality and the environment-induced decoherence’,Progress of Theoretical Physics 89, 281–312. CrossRef
- Zurek, W. H.: 1993b, ‘Negotiating the tricky border between quantum and classical’,Physics Today 46, 13–5, 81–90.
- Dissipating the quantum measurement problem
Volume 14, Issue 1 , pp 55-65
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Richard Healey (1)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA