Advertisement

Foundations of Physics

, Volume 1, Issue 1, pp 69–76 | Cite as

On the interpretation of measurement in quantum theory

  • H. D. Zeh
Article

Abstract

It is demonstrated that neither the arguments leading to inconsistencies in the description of quantum-mechanical measurement nor those “explaining” the process of measurement by means of thermodynamical statistics are valid. Instead, it is argued that the probability interpretation is compatible with an objective interpretation of the wave function.

Keywords

Wave Function Quantum Theory Thermodynamical Statistic Probability Interpretation Objective Interpretation 
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. 1.
    E. P. Wigner,Am. J. Phys. 31, 6 (1963); B. d'Espagnat,Nuovo Cimento (Suppl.)4, 828 (1966); T. Earman and A. Shimony,Nuovo Cimento 54B, 332 (1968); J. M. Jauch, E. P. Wigner, and M. M. Yanase,Nuovo Cimento 48B, 144 (1967); G. Ludwig, inWerner Heisenberg und die Physik unserer Zeit (Braunschweig, 1961).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    G. Ludwig,Die Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik (Berlin, 1954), p. 122 ff.;Z. Physik 135, 483 (1953); A. Danieri, A. Loinger, and G. M. Prosperi,Nucl. Phys. 33, 297 (1962);Nuovo Cimento 44B, 119 (1966); L. Rosenfeld,Progr. Theoret. Phys. (Suppl.) p. 222 (1965); W. Weidlich,Z. Physik 205, 199 (1967).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. S. Bell,Rev. Mod. Phys. 38, 447 (1966); D. Bohm and J. Bub,Rev. Mod. Phys. 38, 453 (1966).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. von Neumann,Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik (Springer, Berlin, 1932) [English translation: Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Princeton University Press, Princeton, N. J., 1955)].Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. J. Glauber,Phys. Rev. 131, 2766 (1963); P. Caruthers and M. M. Nieto,Am. J. Phys. 33, 537 (1965); B. Jancovici and D. Schiff,Nucl. Phys. 58, 678 (1964); C. L. Mehta and E. C. G. Sudarshan,Phys. Rev. 138, B274 (1965).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    E. Schrödinger,Z. Physik 14, 664 (1926).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. Bohm,Quantum Theory (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1951).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. M. Jauch,Helv. Phys. Acta 33, 711 (1960).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    H. Everett,Rev. Mod. Phys. 29, 454 (1957); J. A. Wheeler,Rev. Mod. Phys. 29, 463 (1957).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    E. P. Wigner, inThe Scientist Speculates, L. J. Good, ed. (Heinemann, London, 1962), p. 284.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    W. M. Elsasser,The Physical Foundation of Biology (Pergamon Press, New York and London, 1958).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. Einstein, N. Rosen, and B. Podolski,Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935); D. Bohm and Y. Aharonov,Phys. Rev. 108, 1070 (1957).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    G. C. Wick, A. S. Wightman, and E. P. Wigner,Phys. Rev. 88, 101 (1952); E. P. Wigner and M. M. Yanase,Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. (US) 49, 910 (1963).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    W. Heisenberg,Rev. Mod. Phys. 29, 269 (1957); Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio,Phys. Rev. 122, 345 (1961).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    H. D. Zeh,Z. Physik 202, 38 (1967).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1970

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. D. Zeh
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Theoretische PhysikUniversität HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany

Personalised recommendations