Philosophy of Science 58 (3):359-376 (1991)
|Abstract||Usual derivations of Lilders's projection rule show that Liuders's rule is the rule required by quantum statistics to calculate the final state after an ideal (minimally disturbing) measurement. These derivations are at best inconclusive, however, when it comes to interpreting Liuders's rule as a description of individual state transformations. In this paper, I show a natural way of deriving Liiders's rule from well-motivated and explicit physical assumptions referring to individual systems. This requires, however, the introduction of a concept of individual state which is not standard.|
|Keywords||interpretation of quantum mechanics projection postulate Luders Rule|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
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.
Paul Teller (1983). The Projection Postulate as a Fortuitous Approximation. Philosophy of Science 50 (3):413-431.
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.
David Strayhorn, General Relativity and the Probability Interpretation of Everett's Relative State Formulation.
Sergio Martinez (1988). Minimal Disturbance in Quantum Logic. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:83 - 88.
Geoffrey Hellman (1981). Quantum Logic and the Projection Postulate. Philosophy of Science 48 (3):469-486.
Allen Stairs (1982). Quantum Logic and the Luders Rule. Philosophy of Science 49 (3):422-436.
Sergio Martinez (1990). A Search for the Physical Content of Luders' Rule. Synthese 82 (1):97 - 125.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads5 ( #162,017 of 556,837 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?