Popper's variant of the EPR experiment does not test the copenhagen interpretation
Philosophy of Science 52 (3):470-476 (1985)
| Abstract | This article has no associated abstract. (fix it) | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,875 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesJeffrey Bub (1982). Quantum Logic, Conditional Probability, and Interference. Philosophy of Science 49 (3):402-421.
Ravi Gomatam (2007). Niels Bohr's Interpretation and the Copenhagen Interpretation—Are the Two Incompatible? Philosophy of Science 74 (5):736-748.
A. A. Pechenkin (2002). Mandelstam's Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics in Comparative Perspective. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 16 (3):265 – 284.
Mauricio Suárez (2004). On Quantum Propensities: Two Arguments Revisited. Erkenntnis 61 (1):1-16.
Gary M. Hardegree (1976). The Modal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1976:82 - 103.
Don Howard (2004). Who Invented the “Copenhagen Interpretation”? A Study in Mythology. Philosophy of Science 71 (5):669-682.
A. Peres (2002). Karl Popper and the Copenhagen Interpretation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 33 (1):23-34.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads11 ( #100,810 of 556,837 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,837 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
