David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46 (1):33-57 (1995)
The distinguishing feature of ‘modal’ interpretations of quantum mechanics is their abandonment of the orthodox eigenstate–eigenvalue rule, which says that an observable possesses a definite value if and only if the system is in an eigenstate of that observable. Kochen's and Dieks' new biorthogonal decomposition rule for picking out which observables have definite values is designed specifically to overcome the chief problem generated by orthodoxy's rule, the measurement problem, while avoiding the no-hidden-variable theorems. Otherwise, their new rule seems completely ad hoc. The ad hoc charge can only be laid to rest if there is some way to give Kochen's and Dieks' rule for picking out which observables have definite values some independent motivation. And there is, or so I will argue here. Specifically, I shall show that theirs is the only rule able to save Schrödinger's cat from a fate worse than death, and sidestep the Bell–Kochen–Specker no-hidden-variables theorem, once we impose four independently natural conditions on such rules.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Olimpia Lombardi, Mario Castagnino & Juan Sebastián Ardenghi (2010). The Modal-Hamiltonian Interpretation and the Galilean Covariance of Quantum Mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 41 (2):93-103.
Similar books and articles
Michael Dickson (1996). Logical Foundations for Modal Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. Philosophy of Science 63 (3):329.
Rob Clifton (1996). The Properties of Modal Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 47 (3):371-398.
Frank Arntzenius (1990). Kochen's Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:241 - 249.
Dennis Dieks (2007). Probability in Modal Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 38 (2):292-310.
Olimpia Lombardi & Mario Castagnino (2008). A Modal-Hamiltonian Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 39 (2):380-443.
Graciela Domenech, Hector Freytes & Christian de Ronde, The Contextual Character of Modal Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics.
David Albert & Barry Loewer (1990). Wanted Dead or Alive: Two Attempts to Solve Schrodinger's Paradox. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:277 - 285.
E. P. (1999). Two No-Go Theorems for Modal Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 30 (3):403-431.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads48 ( #49,368 of 1,696,654 )
Recent downloads (6 months)15 ( #39,613 of 1,696,654 )
How can I increase my downloads?