International Journal of Theoretical Physics

, Volume 44, Issue 11, pp 1977–1987 | Cite as

Logical Pre- and Post-Selection Paradoxes, Measurement-Disturbance and Contextuality

  • M S LeiferEmail author
  • R W Spekkens


Many seemingly paradoxical effects are known in the predictions for outcomes of measurements made on pre- and post-selected quantum systems. A class of such effects, which we call ‘`logical pre- and post-selection paradoxes,’' bear a striking resemblance to proofs of the Bell-Kochen-Specker theorem, which suggests that they demonstrate the contextuality of quantum mechanics. Despite the apparent similarity, we show that such effects can occur in noncontextual hidden variable theories, provided measurements are allowed to disturb the values of the hidden variables.

Key Words

pre-selection post-selection contextuality hidden variables ABL rule 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aharonov, Y., Bergman, P. G., and Lebowitz, J. L. (1964). Time symmetry in the quantum process of measurement. Physical Review 134(6B), B1410–B1416.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  2. Aharonov, Y. and Vaidman, L. (2002). The two-state vector formalism of quantum mechanics. In: Muga, J. G., Sala Mayato, R., and Egusquiza, I. L. (eds), Time in Quantum Mechanics, pp. 369–412, Springer. quant-ph/0105101.Google Scholar
  3. Albert, D. Z., Aharonov, Y., and D'Amato, S. (1985). Curious new statistical prediction of quantum mechanics. Physical Review Letters, 54(1), 5–7.CrossRefADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. Albert, D. Z., Aharonov, Y., and D'Amato, S. (1986). Comment on “curious properties of quantum ensembles which have been both preselected and post-selected.” Physical Review Letters 56(22), 2427.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  5. Bell, J. S. (1966). On the problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. Reviews of Modern Physics 38, 447.CrossRefADSzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. Bub, J. and Brown, H. (1986). Curious properties of quantum ensembles which have been both preselected and post-selected. Physical Review Letters 56, 2337–2340.CrossRefADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. Kastner, R. E. (2003). The nature of the controversy over time-symmetric quantum counterfactuals. Philosophical Science 70, 145.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Kirkpatrick, K. A. (2003). Classical three-box “paradox.” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 36(17), 4891–4900.CrossRefADSzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. Kochen, S. and Specker, E. P. (1967). The problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. Journal of Mathematical Mechanics 17, 59.Google Scholar
  10. Leifer, M. S. and Spekkens, R. W. (2005). Pre- and post-selection paradoxes and contextuality in quantum mechanics. Physical Review Letters 95, 200405, quant-ph/0412178.Google Scholar
  11. ders, G. (1951). Über die zustandsänderung durch den meβprozeβ. Ann. Physik 8, 322–328. Translated by K. A. Kirkpatrick, Annalen der physik, quant-ph/0403007.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. Marchildon, L. (2003). The counterfactual meaning of the ABL rule. quant-ph/0307082.Google Scholar
  13. Spekkens, R. W. (2004a). Contextuality for preparations, transformations, and unsharp measurements. quant-ph/0406166.Google Scholar
  14. Spekkens, R. W. (2004b). In defense of the epistemic view of quantum states: A toy theory. quant-ph/0401052.Google Scholar
  15. Vaidman, L. (1999). Defending time-symmetrised quantum counterfactuals. Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies In History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 30(3), 373–397. CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Perimeter Institute for Theoretical PhysicsWaterlooCanada
  2. 2.Perimeter Institute for Theoretical PhysicsWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations