Quantum entanglement and nonideal measurements: A critique of Margenau's objections to the projection postulate
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 89 (2):229 - 251 (1991)
I defend the projection postulate against two of Margenau's criticisms. One involves two types of nonideal measurements, measurements that disturb and measurements that annihilate. Such measurements cannot be characterized using the original version of the projection postulate. This is one of the most interesting and powerful objections to the projection postulate since most realistic measurements are nonideal, in Margenau's sense. I show that a straightforward generalization of the projection postulate is capable of handling the more realistic kinds of measurements considered by Margenau. His other objection involves the EPR (Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen) situation. He suggests that there is a significant potential for violations of the no-superluminalsignals requirement of the special theory of relativity, if projections occur in this situation and others like it. He also suggests that what is paradoxical about this situation disappears if the projection postulate is rejected. I show that it is not possible to use measurements on pairs of spatially-separated systems whose states are entangled to transmit information superluminally, and generalize this result to include nonideal measurements. I also show that EPR's dilemma does not really depend on the projection postulate.
|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
J. S. Bell (2004 ). On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox. In Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge University Press. 14--21.
Nancy Cartwright (1983). How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford University Press.
Willem M. De Muynck (1986). On the Relation Between the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox and the Problem of Nonlocality in Quantum Mechanics. Foundations of Physics 16 (10):973-1002.
P. H. Eberhard (1978). Bell's Theorem and the Different Concepts of Locality. Il Nuovo Cimento 46:392--419.
Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky & Nathan Rosen (1935). Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? Physical Review (47):777-780.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
W. M. de Muynck (1995). Measurement and the Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics and Relativity Theory. Synthese 102 (2):293-318.
Paul Teller (1980). The Projection Postulate and Bohr's Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:201 - 223.
Alisa Bokulich (2003). Quantum Measurements and Supertasks. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 17 (2):127 – 136.
Hasok Chang (1997). On the Applicability of the Quantum Measurement Formalism. Erkenntnis 46 (2):143-163.
Henry Margenau (1963). Measurements and Quantum States: Part II. Philosophy of Science 30 (2):138-157.
Paul Teller (1983). The Projection Postulate as a Fortuitous Approximation. Philosophy of Science 50 (3):413-431.
Frederick M. Kronz (1992). The Projection Postulate and the Time-Energy Uncertainty Relation. Philosophy of Science 59 (1):1-15.
W. Michael Dickson (1995). Is There Really No Projection Postulate in the Modal Interpretation? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46 (2):197-218.
Geoffrey Hellman (1981). Quantum Logic and the Projection Postulate. Philosophy of Science 48 (3):469-486.
W. M. De Muynck (1995). Measurement and the Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics and Relativity Theory. Synthese 102 (2):293 - 318.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads67 ( #23,479 of 1,100,122 )
Recent downloads (6 months)36 ( #3,991 of 1,100,122 )
How can I increase my downloads?