Foundations of Physics

, Volume 18, Issue 7, pp 723–730 | Cite as

Measurement in Bohm's versus Everett's quantum theory

  • H. -D. Zeh
Part I. Invited Papers Dedicated To David Bohm
Received:

Abstract

The interpretations of measurements in Bohm's and Everett's quantum theories are compared. Since both theories are based on the assumption of a universally valid Schrödinger equation, they face the common problem of how to explain that arrow of time, which in conventional quantum theory is represented by the collapse of the wave function. Its solution requires, in a statistical sense, a very improbable initial condition for thetotal wave function of the universe. The historical importance of Bohm's quantum theory is pointed out.

Keywords

Wave Function Quantum Theory Statistical Sense Historical Importance Conventional Quantum 
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    D. Bohm,Phys. Rev. 85, 166 (1952).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. Einstein, B. Podelsky, and N. Rosen,Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    F. J. Belinfante,A Survey of Hidden-Variables Theories (Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1973).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Pearle,Phys. Rev. D 13, 857 (1976).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    D. Bohm,Phys. Rev. 85, 180 (1952).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    C. Dewdney, P. R. Holland, and A. Kyprianidis,Phys. Lett. A 119, 259 (1986).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    K. Baumann,Nuovo Cimento B 96, 21 (1986).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    H. Everett III,Rev. Mod. Phys. 29, 454 (1957).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. S. Bell, inQuantum Gravity II, C. J. Isham, R. Penrose, and D. W. Sciama, eds. (Clarendon Press, Oxfod, 1981), p. 611.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    H. D. Zeh, inProceedings, 49th Enrico Fermi School of Physics, B. d'Espagnat, ed. (Academic Press, New York, 1972), p. 263.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    E. Schrödinger,Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 32, 446 (1936).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. D. Zeh,Found. Phys. 9 803 (1979).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. D. Zeh,Die Physik der Zeitrichtung, Springer Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol. 200 (1984).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    F. J. Tipler,Phys. Rep. 137, 231 (1986).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    B. S. DeWitt,Phys. Rev. 160, 1113 (1967).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    S. W. Hawking,Phys. Rev. D 32, 2489 (1985).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    H. D. Zeh,Phys. Lett. A 116, 9 (1986).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    E. Joos and H. D. Zeh,Z. Phys. B 59, 223 (1985).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    H. D. Zeh,Found. Phys. 1, 69 (1970).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    D. Bohm and D. J. Hiley,Found. Phys. 14, 255 (1984).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    E. Joos,Phys. Rev. D 29, 1626 (1984).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    O. Kübler and H. D. Zeh,Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 76, 405 (1973).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    W. G. Unruh,Phys. Rev. D 14, 870 (1976).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    C. Kiefer,Class Quant. Grav. 4, 1369 (1987).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. -D. Zeh
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Theoretische PhysikUniversität HeidelbergHeidelberg 1West Germany

Personalised recommendations