David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Philosophical Logic 30 (1):27-50 (2001)
Within the traditional Hilbert space formalism of quantum mechanics, it is not possible to describe a particle as possessing, simultaneously, a sharp position value and a sharp momentum value. Is it possible, though, to describe a particle as possessing just a sharp position value (or just a sharp momentum value)? Some, such as Teller, have thought that the answer to this question is No - that the status of individual continuous quantities is very different in quantum mechanics than in classical mechanics. On the contrary, I shall show that the same subtle issues arise with respect to continuous quantities in classical and quantum mechanics; and that it is, after all, possible to describe a particle as possessing a sharp position value without altering the standard formalism of quantum mechanics
|Keywords||Boolean algebra probability measure unsharp quantum logic|
|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
Jeffrey Bub (1998). Interpreting the Quantum World. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (4):637-641.
D. J. Foulis & M. K. Bennett (1994). Effect Algebras and Unsharp Quantum Logics. Foundations of Physics 24 (10):1331-1352.
J. Bub & R. Clifton (1996). A Uniqueness Theorem for 'No Collapse' Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 27 (2):181-219.
David Pincus & Robert M. Solovay (1977). Definability of Measures and Ultrafilters. Journal of Symbolic Logic 42 (2):179-190.
Hans Halvorson & Rob Clifton (1999). Maximal Beable Subalgebras of Quantum-Mechanical Observables. International Journal of Theoretical Physics 38:2441-2484.
Citations of this work BETA
Hans Halvorson (2004). Complementarity of Representations in Quantum Mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 35 (1):45-56.
Hans Halvorson (2004). Complementarity of Representations in Quantum Mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 35 (1):45-56.
Laura Ruetsche (2011). Why Be Normal? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 42 (2):107-115.
Laura Ruetsche (2011). Why Be Normal? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 42 (2):107-115.
Similar books and articles
James T. Cushing (2000). Bohmian Insights Into Quantum Chaos. Philosophy of Science 67 (3):445.
Simon Saunders (2006). On the Explanation for Quantum Statistics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 37 (1):192-211.
Federico Laudisa, Relational Quantum Mechanics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
John Forge (2000). Quantities in Quantum Mechanics. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 14 (1):43 – 56.
Paul Teller (1979). Quantum Mechanics and the Nature of Continuous Physical Quantities. Journal of Philosophy 76 (7):345-361.
Valia Allori & Nino Zanghi (2008). On the Classical Limit of Quantum Mechanics. Foundations of Physics 10.1007/S10701-008-9259-4 39 (1):20-32.
Hans Halvorson (2001). On the Nature of Continuous Physical Quantities in Classical and Quantum Mechanics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 30 (1):27-50.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads118 ( #34,412 of 1,934,517 )
Recent downloads (6 months)45 ( #12,276 of 1,934,517 )
How can I increase my downloads?