The Ontic Probability Interpretation of Quantum Theory - Part III: Schrödinger’s Cat and the ‘Basis’ and ‘Measurement’ Pseudo-Problems (2nd edition)

Abstract

Most of us are either philosophically naïve scientists or scientifically naïve philosophers, so we misjudged Schrödinger’s “very burlesque” portrait of Quantum Theory (QT) as a profound conundrum. The clear signs of a strawman argument were ignored. The Ontic Probability Interpretation (TOPI) is a metatheory: a theory about the meaning of QT. Ironically, equating Reality with Actuality cannot explain actual data, justifying the century-long philosophical struggle. The actual is real but not everything real is actual. The ontic character of the Probable has been elusive for so long because it cannot be grasped directly from experiment; it can only be inferred from physical setups that do not morph it into the Actual. In this Part III, Born’s Rule and the quantum formalism for the microworld are intuitively surmised from instances in our macroworld. The posited reality of the quanton’s probable states and properties is probed and proved. After almost a century, TOPI aims at setting the record straight: the so-called ‘Basis’ and ‘Measurement’ problems are ill-advised. About the first, all bases are legitimate regardless of state and milieu. As for the second, its premise is false: there is no need for a physical ‘collapse’ process that would convert many states into a single state. Under TOPI, a more sensible variant of the ‘measurement problem’ can be reformulated in non-anthropic terms as a real problem. Yet, as such, it is not part of QT per se and will be tackled in future papers. As for the mythical cat, the ontic state of a radioactive nucleus is not pure, so its evolution is not governed by Schrödinger’s equation – let alone the rest of his “hellish machine”. Einstein was right: “The Lord is subtle but not malicious”. However, ‘The Lord’ turned out to be much subtler than what Einstein and Schrödinger could have ever accepted. Part IV introduces QR/TOPI: a new theory that solves the century-old problem of integrating Special Relativity with Quantum Theory [1].

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Quantum theory of state reduction and measurement.Izuru Fujiwara - 1972 - Foundations of Physics 2 (2-3):83-110.
Why quantum theory is possibly wrong.Holger Lyre - 2010 - Foundations of Physics 40 (9-10):1429-1438.
Schrödinger's immortal cat.Asher Peres - 1988 - Foundations of Physics 18 (1):57-76.
The Observer in the Quantum Experiment.Bruce Rosenblum & Fred Kuttner - 2002 - Foundations of Physics 32 (8):1273-1293.
Two dogmas about quantum mechanics.Jeffrey Bub & Itamar Pitowsky - 2007 - In Simon Saunders, Jonathan Barrett, Adrian Kent & David Wallace (eds.), Many Worlds?: Everett, Quantum Theory & Reality. Oxford University Press.
A Consistent Quantum Ontology.Robert B. Griffiths - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 44 (2):93-114.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-04-03

Downloads
226 (#84,630)

6 months
96 (#39,776)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The propensity interpretation of probability.Karl R. Popper - 1959 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 10 (37):25-42.
Relational quantum mechanics.Carlo Rovelli - 1996 - International Journal of Theoretical Physics 35 (8):1637--1678.

View all 22 references / Add more references