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 30 (3):403-431 (1999)
Modal interpretations take quantum mechanics as a theory which assigns at all times definite values to magnitudes of quantum systems. In the case of single systems, modal interpretations manage to do so without falling prey to the Kochen and Specker no-go theorem, because they assign values only to a limited set of magnitudes. In this paper I present two further no-go theorems which prove that two modal interpretations become nevertheless problematic when applied to more than one system. The first theorem proves that the modal interpretation proposed by Kochen and by Dieks cannot correlate the values simultaneously assigned to three systems. The second and new theorem proves that the atomic modal interpretation proposed by Bacciagaluppi and Dickson and by Dieks cannot correlate the values simultaneously and sequentially assigned to two systems if one assumes that these correlations are uniquely related to the dynamics of the state of the systems.
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
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.
Dennis Dieks (2007). Probability in Modal Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 38 (2):292-310.
Rob Clifton (1996). The Properties of Modal Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 47 (3):371-398.
Joseph Berkovitz & Meir Hemmo, How to Reconcile Modal Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics with Relativity.
Rob Clifton (1995). Independently Motivating the Kochen-Dieks Modal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46 (1):33-57.
Pieter E. Vermaas (1999). A Philosopher's Understanding of Quantum Mechanics: Possibilities and Impossibilities of a Modal Interpretation. Cambridge University Press.
Michael Dickson (1996). Logical Foundations for Modal Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. Philosophy of Science 63 (3):329.
Joseph Berkovitz & Meir Hemmo (2005). Modal Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics and Relativity: A Reconsideration. [REVIEW] Foundations of Physics 35 (3):373-397.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads6 ( #290,652 of 1,696,506 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #342,645 of 1,696,506 )
How can I increase my downloads?