David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 33 (1):23-34 (2002)
Popper conceived an experiment whose analysis led to a result that he deemed absurd. Popper wrote that his reasoning was based on the Copenhagen interpretation and therefore invalidated it. Many authors who have examined Popper's analysis have found in it various technical flaws which are briefly summarized here. However, the aim of the present article is not technical. My concern is to redress logical flaws in Popper's argument: the terminology he uses is ambiguous, his analysis involves counterfactual hypotheses, and it violates Bohr's complementarity principle. Therefore, the absurdity of Popper's result only confirms Bohr's approach.
|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
Niels Bohr (1935). Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? Physical Review 48 (696--702):696--702.
Niels Bohr (1949). Discussion with Einstein on Epistemological Problems in Atomic Physics. In Paul Arthur Schilpp (ed.), The Library of Living Philosophers, Volume 7. Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist. Open Court 199--241.
Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky & Nathan Rosen (1935). Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? Physical Review (47):777-780.
J. B. Kennedy (1995). On the Empirical Foundations of the Quantum No-Signalling Proofs. Philosophy of Science 62 (4):543-560.
Yoon-Ho Kim & Yanhua Shih (1999). Experimental Realization of Popper's Experiment: Violation of the Uncertainty Principle? [REVIEW] Foundations of Physics 29 (12):1849-1861.
Citations of this work BETA
Kristian Camilleri (2009). Constructing the Myth of the Copenhagen Interpretation. Perspectives on Science 17 (1):pp. 26-57.
Nicolaas P. Landsman (2006). When Champions Meet: Rethinking the Bohr–Einstein Debate. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 37 (1):212-242.
Similar books and articles
Bryan Magee (1999). What Use is Popper to a Practical Politician? In I. C. Jarvie & Sandra Pralong (eds.), Popper's Open Society After Fifty Years: The Continuing Relevance of Karl Popper. Routledge 146.
Don Howard (2004). Who Invented the “Copenhagen Interpretation”? A Study in Mythology. Philosophy of Science 71 (5):669-682.
Adam J. Chmielewski & Karl R. Popper (1999). The Future is Open: A Conversation with Sir Karl Popper. In I. C. Jarvie & Sandra Pralong (eds.), Popper's Open Society After Fifty Years: The Continuing Relevance of Karl Popper. Routledge
David L. Hull (1999). The Use and Abuse of Sir Karl Popper. Biology and Philosophy 14 (4):481-504.
Bruce Caldwell (2005). Recovering Popper: For the Left? Critical Review 17 (1-2):49-68.
Struan Jacobs (1999). Thoughts on Political Sources of Karl Popper's Philosophy of Science. Journal of Philosophical Research 24:445-457.
Boudewijn de Bruin (2006). Popper's Conception of the Rationality Principle in the Social Sciences. In Ian Jarvie, David Miller & Karl Milford (eds.), Karl Popper: A Centenary Assessment: Selected Papers from Karl Popper 2002: Volume III: Science. Ashgate
David Miller (1999). Popper and Tarski. In I. C. Jarvie & Sandra Pralong (eds.), Popper's Open Society After Fifty Years: The Continuing Relevance of Karl Popper. Routledge
Jeff Kochan (2009). Popper's Communitarianism. In Zuzana Parusniková & Robert S. Cohen (eds.), Rethinking Popper (Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 272). Springer 287--303.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads22 ( #121,093 of 1,700,306 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #206,271 of 1,700,306 )
How can I increase my downloads?