Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Why “modal” interpretations of quantum mechanics don't solve the measurement problem

  • Published:
Foundations of Physics Letters

Abstract

According to “modal” interpretations of quantum mechanics, an observable Q can possess a definite value even when the quantum state is not an eigenstate of Q. In this paper, I discuss some interpretive difficulties faced by modal theorists. First, expanding upon Albert and Loewer, I identify two reasons why real-life measurements are never ideal, and I discuss why these considerations bode ill for modal interpretations. Second, I show that modal interpretations provide a less satisfactory explanation of “interference” effects than is provided by pilot-wave interpretations.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. J. Bub,Found. Phys. 22, 737 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  2. J. Bub,Found. Phys. Lett. 6, this issue (1993).

  3. R. Healey,The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics: An Interactive Interpretation (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  4. D. Dieks,Phys. Lett. A 142, 439 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  5. S. Kochen, “A New Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics,” in P. Lahti and P. Middlestadt, eds.,Symposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics (World Scientific, Singapore, 1985), p. 151.

    Google Scholar 

  6. B. van Fraassen,Quantum Mechanics: An Empiricist View (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  7. S. Kochen and E. Specker,J. Math. Mech. 87, 59 (1967).

    Google Scholar 

  8. J. Bell,Rev. Mod. Phys. 38, 447 (1966).

    Google Scholar 

  9. D. Albert and B. Loewer, “Wanted dead or alive: Two attempts to solve Schrödinger's paradox,” in A. Fine, M. Forbes, and L. Wessels, eds.,Proceedings of the 1990 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, Volume 1 (Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, Michigan, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  10. R. Healey,Found. Phys. Lett. 6, this issue (1993).

  11. G. Fleming,Phys. Rev. B139, 963 (1965).

    Google Scholar 

  12. S. N. M. Ruijsenaars,Ann. Phys. (New York) 137, 33 (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  13. G. C. Hegerfeldt,Phys. Rev. D10, 3320 (1974).

    Google Scholar 

  14. G. C. Hegerfeldt,Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 2395 (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  15. W. H. Zurek,Phys. Today 44 (10), 36 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  16. D. Bohm and B. Hiley,Phys. Rep. 144, 321 (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  17. A. Elby,Phil. Sci. 59, 16 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  18. H. Krips,The Metaphysics of Quantum Theory (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physics, University of California at Berkeley, 94720, Berkeley, California, USA

    Andrew Elby

Authors
  1. Andrew Elby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Elby, A. Why “modal” interpretations of quantum mechanics don't solve the measurement problem. Found Phys Lett 6, 5–19 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00683106

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00683106

Key words

Search

Navigation