Causality and the Modeling of the Measurement Process in Quantum Theory

Open access

Abstract

In this paper we provide a general account of the causal models which attempt to provide a solution to the famous measurement problem of Quantum Mechanics (QM). We will argue that—leaving aside instrumentalism which restricts the physical meaning of QM to the algorithmic prediction of measurement outcomes—the many interpretations which can be found in the literature can be distinguished through the way they model the measurement process, either in terms of the efficient cause or in terms of the final cause. We will discuss and analyze why both, ‘final cause’ and ‘efficient cause’ models, face severe difficulties to solve the measurement problem. In contradistinction to these schemes we will present a new model based on the immanent cause which, we will argue, provides an intuitive understanding of the measurement process in QM.

Agamben, Giorgio. 1999. Potencialities. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Aristotle. 1995. The Complete Works of Aristotle. The Revised Oxford Translation, ed. by J. Barnes. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Bacciagaluppi, Guido. 1995. Kochen-Specker theorem in the modal interpretation of quantum mechanics. International Journal of Theoretical Physics 34: 1205–16.

Bacciagaluppi, Guido. 1996. Topics in the Modal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Doctoral dissertation. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.

Bacciagaluppi, Guido; and Dickson, Michael. 1997. Dynamics for density operator interpretations of quantum theory. Preprint. (quant-ph/arXiv:quantph/9711048)

Barrett, Jeffrey. 2011. Everett’s pure wave mechanics and the notion of worlds. European Journal for Philosophy of Science 1: 277–302.

Barrett, Jeffrey. 2016. Quantum worlds. Principia 20: 45–60.

Bohr, Niels. 1928. The quantum postulate and the recent development of atomic theory. Nature 121: 580–90.

Bohr, Niles. 1934. Atomic Theory and the Description of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bokulich, Peter; and Bokulich, Alisa. 2005. Niels Bohr’s generalization of classical mechanics. Foundations of Physics 35: 347–71.

Bub, Jeffrey. 1992. Quantum mechanics without the projection postulate. Foundations of Physics 22: 737–54.

Cohen-Tannoudji, Claude; Diu, Bernard; and Laloë, Frank. 1977. Quantum Mechanics. John Wiley and Sons, London.

da Costa, Newton; and de Ronde, Christian. 2013. The paraconsistent logic of quantum superpositions. Foundations of Physics 43: 845–58.

Dawin, Richard; and Thébault, Karim. 2015. Many worlds: incoherent or decoherent? Synthese 192: 1559–80.

de Ronde, Christian. 2016a. ‘Probabilistic knowledge’ as ‘objective knowledge’ in quantum mechanics: potential immanent powers instead of actual properties. In Probing the Meaning of Quantum Mechanics: Superpositions, Semantics, Dynamics and Identity, ed. by D. Aerts, C. de Ronde, H. Freytes and R. Giuntini. Singapore: World Scientific, 141–78.

de Ronde, Christian. 2016b. Representational realism, closed theories and the quantum to classical limit. In Quantum Structural Studies, ed. by R. E. Kastner, J. Jeknic-Dugic and G. Jaroszkiewicz. Singapore: World Scientific, 105–36.

de Ronde, Christian. 2016c. Hilbert space quantum mechanics is contextual. (Reply to R. B. Griffiths.) Cadernos de História e Filosofia da Ciencia 2(1), Série 4: 131–60.

de Ronde, Christian. 2016d. Quantum superpositions and the representation of physical reality beyond measurement outcomes and mathematical structures. Foundations of Science, accepted for publication. DOI: 10.1007/s10699-017-9541-z.

de Ronde, Christian; Freytes, Hector; and Domenech, Graciela. 2014. Interpreting the modal Kochen-Specker theorem: possibility and many worlds in quantum mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 45: 11–8.

DeWitt, Brice; and Graham, Neill. 1973. The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Dickson, Michael. 1998. Quantum Chance and Nonlocality: Probability and Nonlocality in the Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dieks, Dennis. 1988. The formalism of quantum theory: an objective description of reality. Annalen der Physik 7: 174–90.

Dieks, Dennis. 2007. Probability in the modal interpretation of quantum mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 38: 292–10.

Dieks, Dennis. 2010. Quantum mechanics, chance and modality. Philosophica 82: 117–37.

Dijksterhuis, Eduard Jan. 1986. The Mechanisation of the Worldpicture: Pythagoras to Newton. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Dirac, Paul. 1974. The Principles of Quantum Mechanics. 4th Edition. London: Oxford University Press.

Domenech, Graciela; Freytes, Hector; and de Ronde, Christian. 2006. Scopes and limits of modality in quantum mechanics. Annalen der Physik 15: 853–60.

Dorato, Mauro. 2006. Properties and dispositions: some metaphysical remarks on quantum ontology. Proceedings of the AIP 844: 139–57.

Dorato, Mauro. 2011. Do dispositions and propensities have a role in the ontology of quantum mechanics? Some critical remarks. In Probabilities, Causes, and Propensities in Physics, ed. by M. Suárez. Synthese Library, Dordrecht: Springer, 197–218.

Everett, Hugh. 1957. On the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Doctoral dissertation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Everett, Hugh. 1973. The theory of the universal wave function. In The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, ed. by DeWitt and Graham. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Fine, Arthur. 1986. The Shaky Game. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Ghirardi, Giancarlo; Rimini, Alberto; and Weber, Tulio. 1986. Unified dynamics for microscopic and macroscopic systems. Physical Review D 34(2): 470–91.

Heisenberg, Werner. 1927. Üeber den anschaulichen Inhalt der quantentheoretischen Kinematik and Mechanik. Zeitschrift fuÜr Physik 43: 172–98. English translation in Wheeler and Zurek 1983: 62–84.

Heisenberg, Werner. 1958. Physics and Philosophy. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd.

Hilgevoord, Jan; and Uffink, Joos. 2001. The uncertainty principle. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2001 Edition), ed. by E. N. Zalta. URL: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2001/entries/qt-uncertainty/.

Howard, Don. 2004. Who invented the ‘Copenhagen interpretation’? A study in mythology. Philosophy of Science 71: 669–82.

Jammer, Max. 1966. The Conceptual Development of Quantum Mechanics. New York: McGraw Hill.

Jansson, Lina. 2016. Everettian quantum mechanics and physical probability: against the principle of ‘state supervenience’. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 53: 45–53.

Jones, Sheilla. 2008. The Quantum Ten. A Story Of Passion Tragedy Ambition And Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kastner, Ruth. 2014. ‘Einselection’ of pointer observables: the new H-theorem? Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 48: 56–8.

Margenau, Henri. 1954. Advantages and disadvantages of various interpretations of the quantum theory. Physics Today 7: 6–13.

Maxwell, Nicholas. 1988. Quantum propensiton theory: a testable resolution to the wave/particle dilemma. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 39: 1–50.

Melamed, Yitzhak. 2013. Spinoza’s Metaphysics and Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nadler, Steven. 2013. Baruch Spinoza. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (Fall 2013 Edition), ed. by Edward N. Zalta. forthcoming URL: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/spinoza/.

Pauli, Wolfgang; and Jung, Carl Gustav. 2001. Atom and Archetype. The Pauli/Jung Letters 1932-1958. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Piron, Constantin. 1976. Foundations of Quantum Physics. Massachusetts: W.A. Benjamin Inc.

Piron, Constantin. 1981. Ideal measurements and probability in quantum mechanics. Erkenntnis 16: 397–401.

Piron, Constantin. 1983. Le realisme en physique quantique: une approche selon Aristote. In The Concept of Physical Reality. Proceedings of a conference organized by the Interdisciplinary Research Group, Athens: University of Athens.

Popper, Karl. 1982. Quantum Theory and the Schism in Physics. New Jersey: Rowman and Littlefield.

Sakurai, Jun; and Napolitano, Jim. 2010. Modern Quantum Mechanics. London: Addison-Wesley.

Schrödinger, Erwin. 1935. The present situation in quantum mechanics. Naturwiss 23: 807. Translated to English in Quantum Theory and Measurement, ed. by J. A. Wheeler and W. H. Zurek. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983.

Smets, Sonja. 2005. The modes of physical properties in the logical foundations of physics. Logic and Logical Philosophy 14: 37–53.

Suárez, Mauricio. 2004. Quantum selections, propensities, and the problem of measurement. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55: 219–55.

Suárez, Mauricio. 2007. Quantum propensities. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 38: 418–38.

Van Fraassen, Bas. 1991. Quantum Mechanics: An Empiricist View. Oxford: Clarendon.

Verelst, Karin; and Coecke, Bob. 1999. Early Greek thought and perspectives for the interpretation of quantum mechanics: preliminaries to an ontological approach. In The Blue Book of Einstein Meets Magritte, ed. by D. Aerts. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 163–96.

Vermaas, Pieter. 1997. A no-go theorem for joint property ascriptions in modal interpretations of quantum mechanics. Physical Review Letters 78: 2033.

Vermaas, Pieter. 1997. A Philosophers Understanding of Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Vermaas, Pieter; and Dieks, Dennis. 1995. The modal interpretation of quantum mechanics and its generalization to density operators. Foundations of Physics 25: 145–58.

Von Neumann, John. 1996. Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. 12th edition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Wheeler, John; and Zurek, Wojcieck (eds). 1983. Theory and Measurement. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Disputatio

International Journal of Philosophy

Journal Information

Cited By

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 80 80 80
PDF Downloads 50 50 50