Skip to main content
Log in

Empirical reality, empirical causality, and the measurement problem

  • Part I. Invited Papers Dedicated To Ilya Prigogine
  • Published:
Foundations of Physics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Does physics describe anything that can meaningfully be called “independent reality,” or is it merely operational? Most physicists implicitly favor an intermediate standpoint, which takes quantum physics into account, but which nevertheless strongly holds fast to quite strictly realistic ideas about apparently “obvious facts” concerning the macro-objects. Part 1 of this article, which is a survey of recent measurement theories, shows that, when made explicit, the standpoint in question cannot be upheld. Part 2 brings forward a proposal for making minimal changes to this standpoint in such a way as to remove such objections. The “empirical reality” thus constructed is a notion that, to some extent,does ultimately refer to the human means of apprehension and of data processing. It nevertheless cannot be said that it reduces to a mere name just labelling a “set of recipes that never fail.” It is shown that our usual notion of macroscopic causality must be endowed with similar features.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. J. A. Wheeler, inMathematical Foundations of Quantum Theory, A. R. Marlow, ed. (Academic, New York, 1978).

    Google Scholar 

  2. B. d'Espagnat,Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, 2nd edn. (Benjamin/Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1976).

    Google Scholar 

  3. S. Machida and M. Namiki,Prog. Theor. Phys. 63, 1457, 1833 (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  4. S. Machida and M. Namiki, inProceedings of the International Symposium on Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Tokyo, 1983, S. Kamefuchiet al., eds., pp. 127 and 136.

  5. H. Araki,Prog. Theor. Phys. 64, 719 (1980); “A continuous superselection rule as a model of classical measuring apparatus in quantum mechanics,” talk given at the conference on Fundamental Aspects of Quantum Theory in Como, Italy, September 2–7, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  6. W. H. Zurek,Phys. Rev. D 24, 1516 (1981);26, 1862 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  7. H. D. Zeh,Found. Phys. 9, 803 (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  8. K. Hepp,Helv. Phys. Acta 45, 237 (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  9. J. S. Bell,Helv. Phys. Acta 48, 93 (1975).

    Google Scholar 

  10. R. Griffiths,J. Stat. Phys. 36, 219 (1984); Carnegie Mellon University Preprint, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  11. B. d'Espagnat,In Search of Reality (Springer, New York, 1983);Une incertaine réalité (Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1985).

    Google Scholar 

  12. H. Primas,Lecture Notes in Chemistry (Springer, New York, 1981).

    Google Scholar 

  13. H. Primas,Foundations of Theoretical Chemistry, in Lecture Notes for the NATO Advanced Study Institute, R. G. Wooley, ed. (Plenum, New York, 1980).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Dedicated to Professor Ilya Prigogine on his 70th birthday.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

d'Espagnat, B. Empirical reality, empirical causality, and the measurement problem. Found Phys 17, 507–529 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01559699

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01559699

Keywords

Navigation