Advertisement

Foundations of Physics

, Volume 13, Issue 8, pp 813–841 | Cite as

Realism, operationalism, and quantum mechanics

  • D. Foulis
  • C. Piron
  • C. Randall
Part II. Invited Papers Dedicated to Günther Ludwig

Abstract

A comprehensive formal system is developed that amalgamates the operational and the realistic approaches to quantum mechanics. In this formalism, for example, a sharp distinction is made between events, operational propositions, and the properties of physical systems.

Keywords

Quantum Mechanic Physical System Formal System Realistic Approach Sharp Distinction 
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.
    D. Aerts, “Description of many physical entities without the paradoxes encountered in quantum mechanics,”Found. Phys. 12, 1131 (1982).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    E. Beltrametti and G. Cassinelli,The Logic of Quantum Mechanics (Volume 15 ofEncyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications), G.-C. Rota, ed. (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1981).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    G. Birkhoff,Lattice Theory (American Math. Society Colloquium Publication XXV), 3rd ed., 1967.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, “Can the quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?”Phys. Review 47, 777–780 (1935).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. Fischer and G. Rüttimann, “The geometry of the state space,” inMathematical Foundations of Quantum Theory, A. Marlow, ed. (Academic Press, New York, 1978), pp. 153–176.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. J. Foulis and C. H. Randall, “Manuals, morphisms, and quantum mechanics,” inMathematical Foundations of Quantum Theory, A. Marlow, ed. (Academic Press, New York, 1978), pp. 105–126.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. J. Foulis and C. H. Randall, “What are quantum logics and what ought they to be?” inCurrent Issues in Quantum Logic, E. Beltrametti and B. van Fraassen, eds. (Plenum Press, New York, 1981), pp. 35–52.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. J. Foulis and C. H. Randall, “Empirical logic and tensor products,” inInterpretations and Foundations of Quantum Theory, H. Neumann, ed. (B. I. Wissenschaftsverlag, Bibliographisches Institut, Mannheim, 1981), pp. 9–20.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. J. Foulis and C. H. Randall, “The empirical logic approach to the physical sciences,” inFoundations of Quantum Mechanics and Ordered Linear Spaces, A. Hartkämper and H. Neumann, eds. (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1974), pp. 230–249.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    A. M. Gleason, “Measures on the closed subspaces of a Hilbert space,”J. Math. Mech. 6, 885–893 (1957).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. J. Greechie, “On the structure of orthomodular lattices satisfying the chain condition,”J. Combinatorial Theory 4, 210–218 (1968).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    P. R. Halmos,Lectures on Boolean Algebras (D. van Nostrand, Princeton, 1963).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. A. Lodkin, “Every measure on the projectors of aW*-algebra can be extended to a state,”Functional Analysis and its Applications 8, 318–321 (1974).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    B. Mielnik, “Geometry of quantum states,”Commun. Math. Phys. 9, 55–80 (1968).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    B. Mielnik, “Generalized quantum mechanics,”Commun. Math. Phys. 37, 221–256 (1974).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    B. Mielnik, “Quantum logic: Is it necessarily orthocomplemented?” inQuantum Mechanics, Determinism, Causality, and Particles, M. Flatoet al., eds. (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1976).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    C. Piron,Foundations of Quantum Physics (W. A. Benjamin, Inc., Reading, Mass., 1976).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    C. Piron, “New quantum mechanics,” inOld and New Questions in Physics, Cosmology, Philosophy, and Theoretical Biology: Essays in Honor of Wolfgang Yourgrau (Plenum Press, New York, 1983).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    C. H. Randall and D. J. Foulis, “The operational approach to quantum mechanics,” inThe Logico-Algebraic Approach to Quantum Mechanics III:Physical Theory as Logical-Operational Structure, C. Hooker, ed. (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1978), pp. 167–201.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    C. H. Randall and D. J. Foulis, “Operational statistics and tensor products,” inInterpretations and Foundations of Quantum Theory, H. Neumann, ed. (B. I. Wissenschaftsverlag, Bibliographisches Institut, Mannheim, 1981), pp. 21–28.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    C. H. Randall and D. J. Foulis, “A mathematical setting for inductive reasoning,” inFoundations of Probability Theory, Statistical Inference, and Statistical Theories of Science III, C. Hooker, ed. (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1976), pp. 169–205.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. Foulis
    • 1
    • 2
  • C. Piron
    • 1
    • 2
  • C. Randall
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.University of MassachusettsAmherst
  2. 2.University of GenevaSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations