Foundations of Physics 49 (1):24-52 (2019)

Abstract
Having analyzed the formal aspects of Wallace’s proof of the Born rule, we now discuss the concepts and axioms upon which it is built. Justification for most axioms is shown to be problematic, and at times contradictory. Some of the problems are caused by ambiguities in the concepts used. We conclude the axioms are not reasonable enough to be taken as mandates of rationality in Everettian Quantum Mechanics. This invalidates the interpretation of Wallace’s result as meaning it would be rational for Everettian agents to decide using the Born rule.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s10701-018-0226-4
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 63,247
External links

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

Time and Chance.S. French - 2005 - Mind 114 (453):113-116.
Quantum Theory of Probability and Decisions.David Deutsch - 1999 - Proceedings of the Royal Society of London:3129--37.

View all 29 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Against the Empirical Viability of the Deutsch–Wallace–Everett Approach to Quantum Mechanics.Richard Dawid & Karim P. Y. Thébault - 2014 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 47:55-61.
Everettian Quantum Mechanics and Physical Probability: Against the Principle of “State Supervenience”.Lina Jansson - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 53:45-53.
The Probability Problem in Everettian Quantum Mechanics Persists.F. Dizadji-Bahmani - 2013 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science (2):axt035.
Everettian Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics.Christina Conroy - 2016 - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Objective Probability in Everettian Quantum Mechanics.Alastair Wilson - 2013 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 64 (4):709-737.
Macroscopic Ontology in Everettian Quantum Mechanics.Alastair Wilson - 2011 - Philosophical Quarterly 61 (243):363-382.
A Simple Proof of Born’s Rule for Statistical Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.Biswaranjan Dikshit - 2017 - Journal for Foundations and Applications of Physics 4 (1):24-30.
Understanding Deutsch's Probability in a Deterministic Universe.Hilary Greaves - 2004 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 35 (3):423-456.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-11-22

Total views
22 ( #492,623 of 2,448,510 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,843 of 2,448,510 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes