Synthese 113 (3):347-355 (1997)
|Abstract||Quantum mechanics without the collapse postulate, the bare theory, was proposed by Albert (1992) as a way of understanding Everett's relative-state formulation of quantum mechanics. The basic idea is to try to account for an observer's beliefs by appealing to a type of illusion predicted by the bare theory. This paper responds to some recent objections to the bare theory by providing a more detailed description of the sense in which it can and the sense in which it cannot account for our experience.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Martin Schmidt (2008). On Spacetime, Points, and Bare Particulars. Metaphysica 9 (1):69-77.
Richard Davis (2004). The Brave New Bare Particularism. The Modern Schoolman 81 (4):267-273.
Daniel Giberman (2012). Against Zero-Dimensional Material Objects (and Other Bare Particulars). Philosophical Studies 160 (2):305-321.
Jeffrey A. Barrett (1994). The Suggestive Properties of Quantum Mechanics Without the Collapse Postulate. Erkenntnis 41 (2):233 - 252.
Andrew M. Bailey (2012). No Bare Particulars. Philosophical Studies 158 (1):31-41.
Jeffrey Barrett, Everett's Relative-State Formulation of Quantum Mechanics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Hiroki Nomoto (forthcoming). A General Theory of Bare “Singular” Kind Terms. In Proceedings of the Poster Session of the 29th Annual West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL 29).
J. P. T. MorelandPickavance (2003). Bare Particulars and Individuation Reply to Mertz. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 81 (1):1 – 13.
P. D. Magnus (2004). The Price of Insisting That Quantum Mechanics is Complete. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (2):257-267.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads24 ( #57,791 of 722,765 )
Recent downloads (6 months)18 ( #7,255 of 722,765 )
How can I increase my downloads?