Philosophy of Science 58 (3):359-376 (1991)
Usual derivations of Lilders's projection rule show that Liuders's rule is the rule required by quantum statistics to calculate the final state after an ideal (minimally disturbing) measurement. These derivations are at best inconclusive, however, when it comes to interpreting Liuders's rule as a description of individual state transformations. In this paper, I show a natural way of deriving Liiders's rule from well-motivated and explicit physical assumptions referring to individual systems. This requires, however, the introduction of a concept of individual state which is not standard.
|Keywords||interpretation of quantum mechanics projection postulate Luders Rule|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Is There Really No Projection Postulate in the Modal Interpretation?W. Michael Dickson - 1995 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46 (2):197-218.
The Projection Postulate as a Fortuitous Approximation.Paul Teller - 1983 - Philosophy of Science 50 (3):413-431.
A Modal-Hamiltonian Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.Olimpia Lombardi & Mario Castagnino - 2008 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 39 (2):380-443.
General Relativity and the Probability Interpretation of Everett's Relative State Formulation.David Strayhorn - unknown
Minimal Disturbance in Quantum Logic.Sergio Martinez - 1988 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:83 - 88.
Quantum Logic and the Projection Postulate.Geoffrey Hellman - 1981 - Philosophy of Science 48 (3):469-486.
A Search for the Physical Content of Luders' Rule.Sergio Martinez - 1990 - Synthese 82 (1):97 - 125.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads204 ( #20,061 of 2,172,036 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #325,337 of 2,172,036 )
How can I increase my downloads?