Abstract
We present an exegesis of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen argument for the incompleteness of quantum mechanics, and defend it against the critique in Fine.(1) We contend,contra Fine, that it compares favorably with an argument reconstructed by him from a letter by Einstein to Schrödinger; and also with one given by Einstein in a letter to Popper. All three arguments turn on a dubious assumption of “separability,” which accords separate elements of reality to space-like separated systems. We discuss how this assumption figures in the literature spawned by the Bell inequalities.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
A. Fine,The Shaky Game: Einstein, Realism, and the Quantum Theory (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1986).
A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?Phys. Rev. 47, 777–780, (1935).
K. Popper, Zur Kritik der Ungenauigkeitsrelationen,Naturwiss. 22, 807–808, (1934).
M. Jammer,The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics (Wiley, New York, 1974).
K. Popper,Quantum Theory and the Schism in Physics (Hutchinson & Co., 1982).
G. Hellman, EPR, Bell, and collapse: a route around ‘stochastic’ hidden variables,Phil. Sci. 54, 558–576, (1987).
C. A. Hooker, The nature of quantum mechanical reality, inParadigms and Paradoxes: The Philosophical Challenge of the Quantum Domain, R. G. Colodny, ed. (University of Pittsburgh Series in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 5) (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1972).
D. Howard, Einstein on locality and separability,Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 16, 171–201, (1985).
H. P. Krips, Two paradoxes in quantum theory,Phil. Sci. 36, 145–152, (1969).
H. Krips,The Metaphysics of Quantum Theory (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989).
H. Margenau, Critical points in modern physical theory,Phil. Sci. 4, 337–370, (1937).
M. Redhead, Causality, relativity, and the EPR paradox, inSpace, Time, and Causality, R. Swinburne, ed. (Dordrecht: Reidel, 1982).
M. Redhead,Incompleteness, Nonlocality, and Realism: A Prolegomenon to the Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987).
D. Sharp, The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox re-examined,Phil. Sci. 28, 225–233, (1961).
B. van Fraassen,Quantum Mechanics: an Empiricist View, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991).
L. Wessels, The “EPR” argument: a post-mortem,Philosophical Studies 40, 3–30, (1981).
A. Einstein, Quanten-Mechanik und Wirklichkeit,Dialectica 2, 320–324, (1948); later published as Quantum mechanics and reality inThe Born-Einstein Letters (Walker & Co., New York, 1971).
Martin Jones, (personal communications).
N. Bohr, Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?Phys. Rev. 48, 696–702, (1935).
J. Butterfield, Causal independence in EPR arguments, (unpublished manuscript).
Michael Thau, (personal communication).
K. Popper,The Logic of Scientific Discovery, 5th edn. (Hutchinson & Co., 1968).
A. Einstein, “Autobiographisches”, inAlbert Einstein: Philosopher—Scientist, P. A. Schilpp, ed. (Open Court, La Salle, Illinois, 1949).
Ned Hall, (personal communication).
A. Einstein, Remarks concerning the essays brought together in this co-operative volume, inAlbert Einstein: Philosopher—Scientist, P. A. Schilpp, ed. (Open Court, La Salle, Illinois, 1949).
J. S. Bell, On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox,Physics 1, 195–200, (1964).
A. Aspect, P. Grangier, and G. Roger, Experimental tests of realistic local theories via Bell's theorem,Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 460–467, (1981).
A. Aspect, P. Grangier, and G. Roger, Experimental realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-BohmGedankenexperiment: A new violation of Bell's inequalities,Phys. Rev. Lett. 48, 91–94, (1982).
A. Aspect, J. Dalibard, and G. Roger, Experimental test of Bell's inequalities using time-varying analyzers,Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1804–1807, (1982).
D. Howard (unpublished manuscript, presented at the 1991 Cesena Conference in memory of John Bell): Locality, separability, and the physical implications of the Bell experiments.
J. P. Jarrett, Bell's theorem: a guide to the implications, inPhilosophical Consequences of Quantum Theory, J. Cushing and E. McMullin, eds. (University of Notre Dame Press, 1989).
A. Shimony, Events and processes in the quantum world, inQuantum Gravity 3, C. J. Isham, R. Penrose, and D. W. Sciama, eds. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), pp. 182–203.
J. Butterfield, Bell's theorem: what it takes, (unpublished manuscript).
M. Jones, and R. Clifton, Passion into action: completeness, locality and superluminal signalling, presented at thePacific Division Meeting, American Philosophical Association, (1991).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hájek, A., Bub, J. EPR. Found Phys 22, 313–332 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01883898
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01883898