David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy of Science 28 (3):225-233 (1961)
This paper discusses the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox from a new point of view. In section II, the arguments by which Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen reach their paradoxical conclusions are presented. They are found to rest on two critical assumptions: (a) that before a measurement is made on a system consisting of two non-interacting but correlated sub-systems, the state of the entire system is exactly represented by: ψ a (r̄ 1 ,r̄ 2 )=∑ η a η τ η (r̄ 1 ,r̄ 2 )=∑ i,k α ik ψ i (r̄ 1 )σ k (r̄ 2 ) (b) that the exact measurement of an observable A in one of the sub-systems is possible. In section III it is shown that assumption (b) is incorrect. Thus we conclude, as did Bohr, that the results of Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen are not valid. The arguments of section III are quite distinct from Bohr's, and therefore in Section IV this work is related to that of Bohr
|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
O. Costa de Beauregard (1976). Time Symmetry and Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Foundations of Physics 6 (5):539-559.
Similar books and articles
Sascha Vongehr, Many Worlds Model Resolving the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox Via a Direct Realism to Modal Realism Transition That Preserves Einstein Locality.
Tilman Sauer (2007). An Einstein Manuscript on the EPR Paradox for Spin Observables. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 38 (4):879-887.
Gen-Ichiro Nagasaka (1970). The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox Reexamined. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1970:437 - 445.
C. A. Hooker (1971). Sharp and the Refutation of the Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen Paradox. Philosophy of Science 38 (2):224-233.
Bas C. Fraassen (1974). The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox. Synthese 29 (1-4):291 - 309.
N. D. Mermin (1983). Pair Distributions and Conditional Independence: Some Hints About the Structure of Strange Quantum Correlations. Philosophy of Science 50 (3):359-373.
S. V. Bhave (1986). Separable Hidden Variables Theory to Explain Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 37 (4):467-475.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads31 ( #61,841 of 1,140,336 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #60,710 of 1,140,336 )
How can I increase my downloads?