Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Karl R. Popper, 1992: About the EPR controversy

  • Part I. Invited Papers Dedicated To Louis De Broglie
  • Published:
Foundations of Physics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Sir K. R. Popper's experimental schemes challenge the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory, principally Heisenberg's indeterminacy relations and the EPR paradox. “The so-called Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox is not a paradox. It is a theoretical statement in expectation of an interpretation,” says K. R. Popper in this interview. “My experiment ought to be a classical experiment. It is very simple and free from any additional assumption. It should really be done.”

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes and references

  1. M. C. Combourieu, “Controverse autour de la définition de la réalité physique. Le paradoxe d'Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (1935) et la non-séparabilité quantique”Dialectica, (to be published).

  2. D. M. Greenberger, M. A. Horne, and A. Zeilinger, “Going beyond Bell's theorem,” inBell's Theorem, Quantum Theory, and Conceptions of the Universe, M. Kafatos, ed. (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1989), pp. 69–72.

    Google Scholar 

  3. N. D. Mermin, “Quantum mysteries revisited,”Am. J. Phys. 58, 731–734 (1990); “What's wrong with these elements of reality?”Phys. Today 43(6), 9–11 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  4. See K. R. Popper,Quantum Theory and the Schism in Physics (Hutchinson, USA, 1982), 2nd edn., p. 28.

    Google Scholar 

  5. M. Horne, A. Shimony, and A. Zeilinger, “Two-particle interferometry”Nature (London) 347, 429–430 (1990) and references therein.

    Google Scholar 

  6. S. Rozental, ed.,Niels Bohr (Wiley, New York, 1967), p. 103.

    Google Scholar 

  7. K. R. Popper,The Logic of Scientific Discovery (Hutchinson, London, 1959); German title:Logik der Forschung (Springer, Vienna, 1935); French title:La logique de la découverte scientifique (Payot, Paris, 1973).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ref. 7 (end of the books); see index 1 and 2.

    Google Scholar 

  9. A. Einstein, “Quantenmechanick und Wirklichkeit,”Dialectica 2, 320–324 (1949).

    Google Scholar 

  10. W. Heisenberg,The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory (Dover, Chicago, 1930); German title:Die physikalischen Prinzipien der Quantentheorie (Verlag, Leipzig, 1930).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ref. 10; p. 23 (English edition); p. 17 (German edition).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ref. 10; p. 20 (English edition).

    Google Scholar 

  13. P. Eberhard thinks quantum theory is right. Thus he does not see any interest in perform it.

  14. Ref. 1.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Groupe d'Études et de Recherches sur la Science, CNRS-EHESS, 10 rue Monsieur le Prince, 75006, Paris, France

    Marie-Christine Combourieu

Authors
  1. Marie-Christine Combourieu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Combourieu, MC. Karl R. Popper, 1992: About the EPR controversy. Found Phys 22, 1303–1323 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01889715

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01889715

Keywords

Search

Navigation