Frauchiger and Renner have recently claimed to prove that “Single-world interpretations of quantum theory cannot be self-consistent”. This is contradicted by a construction due to Bell, inspired by Bohmian mechanics, which shows that any quantum system can be modelled in such a way that there is only one “world” at any time, but the predictions of quantum theory are reproduced. This Bell–Bohmian theory is applied to the experiment proposed by Frauchiger and Renner, and their argument is critically examined. It is (...) concluded that it is their version of “standard quantum theory”, incorporating state vector collapse upon measurement, that is not self-consistent. (shrink)

According to quantum mechanics, statements about the future made by sentient beings like us are, in general, neither true nor false; they must satisfy a many-valued logic. I propose that the truth value of such a statement should be identified with the probability that the event it describes will occur. After reviewing the history of related ideas in logic, I argue that it gives an understanding of probability which is particularly satisfactory for use in quantum mechanics. I construct a lattice (...) of future-tense propositions, with truth values in the interval [0, 1], and derive logical properties of these truth values given by the usual quantum-mechanical formula for the probability of a history. (shrink)

It is argued that the conventional formulation of quantum mechanics is inadequate: the usual interpretation of the mathematical formalism in terms of the results of measurements cannot be applied to situations in which discontinuous transitions (''quantum jumps'') are observed as they happen, since nothing that can be called a measurement happens at the moment of observation. Attempts to force such observations into the standard mould lead to absurd results: ''a watched pot never boils''. Experiments show both that this result is (...) correct when the experiment does indeed consist of a series of measurements, and that it is not when the experiment consists of a period of observation: quantum jumps do happen. The possibilities for improving the formulation by incorporating transitions in the basic postulates are reviewed, and a satisfactory postulate is obtained by modifying a suggestion of Bell's. This requires a distinction between the external description of the whole of a physical system and internal descriptions which are themselves physical events in the system. It is shown that this gives correct results for simple unstable systems and for the quantum-jump experiments. (shrink)

The quantum-mechanical description of the world, including human observers, makes substantial use of entanglement. In order to understand this, we need to adopt concepts of truth, probability and time which are unfamiliar in modern scientific thought. There are two kinds of statements about the world: those made from inside the world, and those from outside. The conflict between contradictory statements which both appear to be true can be resolved by recognising that they are made in different perspectives. Probability, in an (...) objective sense, belongs in the internal perspective, and to statements in the future tense. Such statements obey a many-valued logic, in which the truth values are identified as probabilities. (shrink)

I discuss the meaning of probability in the Everett-Wheeler interpretation of quantum mechanics, together with the problem of defining histories. To resolve these, I propose an understanding of probability arising from a form of temporal logic: the probability of a future-tense proposition is identified with its truth value in a many-valued and context-dependent logic. In short, probability is degree of truth. These ideas appear to be new, but they are natural and intuitive, and relate to traditional naive ideas of time (...) and chance. Indeed, I argue that Everettian quantum mechanics is the only form of scientific theory that truly incorporates the perception that the future is open. (shrink)

We examine the possible states of subsystems of a system of bits or qubits. In the classical case (bits), this means the possible marginal distributions of a probability distribution on a finite number of binary variables; we give necessary and sufficient conditions for a set of probability distributions on all proper subsets of the variables to be the marginals of a single distribution on the full set. In the quantum case (qubits), we consider mixed states of subsets of a set (...) of qubits; in the case of three qubits we find quantum Bell inequalities—necessary conditions for a set of two-qubit states to be the reduced states of a mixed state of three qubits. We conjecture that these conditions are also sufficient. (shrink)

There are two broad opposing classes of attitudes to reality with corresponding attitudes to knowledge. I argue that these attitudes can be compatible, and that quantum theory requires us to adopt both of them.