Notes on The interpretation of quantum mechanics" or how does physics correspond to reality?
Link to article by Schlosshauer, Kofler and Zeilinger, 2013
Article asks: what does Quantum physics tell us about reality?
The answer? there is still wide ranging disagreement
Wavefunction (is this the wave that Stapp talks about collapsing?)-- central mathematical symbol of quantum mechanics that tells the probability of an event.
Asks: is the wavefunction a physical property? Does it represent what we know?
Can quantum states refer to a single system?
(This is what Mohroff says about quantum states: Quantum states are not evolving states of affairs. Quantum states are probabilities. They just are.)
And Folse: We need to recognize that in the quantum state, we are looking at a system in interaction. Objects are not, as observed, isolated. From this conclusion, the author adds that we have to acknowledge that these interactions do not have a determined outcome and "indeterminacy is a real aspect of nature" (p. 11).
and Bohr "The CI (Copenhagen interpretation) holds that in a quantum state, the observing system is part of the object system; they are complementary to one another."
and Fuchs
Fuchs states: "the quantum state is information. Subjective, incomplete information" (p. 11). He seems to be making a distinction between information which is a human generated body of knowledge and the quantum system which implies something real outside of human.
Article asks: what does Quantum physics tell us about reality?
The answer? there is still wide ranging disagreement
Wavefunction (is this the wave that Stapp talks about collapsing?)-- central mathematical symbol of quantum mechanics that tells the probability of an event.
Asks: is the wavefunction a physical property? Does it represent what we know?
Can quantum states refer to a single system?
(This is what Mohroff says about quantum states: Quantum states are not evolving states of affairs. Quantum states are probabilities. They just are.)
And Folse: We need to recognize that in the quantum state, we are looking at a system in interaction. Objects are not, as observed, isolated. From this conclusion, the author adds that we have to acknowledge that these interactions do not have a determined outcome and "indeterminacy is a real aspect of nature" (p. 11).
and Bohr "The CI (Copenhagen interpretation) holds that in a quantum state, the observing system is part of the object system; they are complementary to one another."
and Fuchs
Fuchs states: "the quantum state is information. Subjective, incomplete information" (p. 11). He seems to be making a distinction between information which is a human generated body of knowledge and the quantum system which implies something real outside of human.
Quantum States are an algorithm for assigning probabilities to what might result from a measurement (see http://www.informationphilosopher.com/presentations/Milan/papers/Mohrhoff_on_Stapp.pdf)
Quantum states are not actual states of affairs but probabilities about possible states of affairs)
Are the physical properties of objects well defined before we measure them? If they are not, what are they before we measure them? In measuring, are we taking stock of what's present or are we creating something (or creating knowledge?).
Most of the respondents interviewed agree that randomness is irreducible and/or is a fundamental concept in nature as opposed to just what we see. (Does this mean that the conclusions Rosenberg reaches are just wrong?)
Comments
Post a Comment