Why error-prone quantum measurements have outcomes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

To solve the quantum measurement problem it is necessary to construct quantum mechanical models of measurement interactions to show why properly conducted measurements always yield definite outcomes. The main barrier to a solution has been the interpretive principle that a quantum system has a definite value for an observable only if it may be described by a quantum eigenstate of the corresponding operator. I have recently proposed a solution to the measurement problem based on alternative interpretive principles. The present paper defends this proposal against recent criticisms which seek to show that it fails to solve the problem unless quantum measurements meet highly idealized conditions which no actual measurement could hope to meet. Several models of error-prone measurements are shown to lead to definite outcomes, and a general defense of the appropriateness of these models is sketched.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)37-54
Number of pages18
JournalFoundations of Physics Letters
Volume6
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1993

Fingerprint

proposals
eigenvectors
operators
interactions

Keywords

  • errorprone measurement
  • measurement problem
  • quantum measurement

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physics and Astronomy(all)

Cite this

Why error-prone quantum measurements have outcomes. / Healey, Richard A.

In: Foundations of Physics Letters, Vol. 6, No. 1, 02.1993, p. 37-54.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{09c22e2bb0cb4c88813d9f7fda3b7610,
title = "Why error-prone quantum measurements have outcomes",
abstract = "To solve the quantum measurement problem it is necessary to construct quantum mechanical models of measurement interactions to show why properly conducted measurements always yield definite outcomes. The main barrier to a solution has been the interpretive principle that a quantum system has a definite value for an observable only if it may be described by a quantum eigenstate of the corresponding operator. I have recently proposed a solution to the measurement problem based on alternative interpretive principles. The present paper defends this proposal against recent criticisms which seek to show that it fails to solve the problem unless quantum measurements meet highly idealized conditions which no actual measurement could hope to meet. Several models of error-prone measurements are shown to lead to definite outcomes, and a general defense of the appropriateness of these models is sketched.",
keywords = "errorprone measurement, measurement problem, quantum measurement",
author = "Healey, {Richard A}",
year = "1993",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1007/BF00683108",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "6",
pages = "37--54",
journal = "Foundations of Physics Letters",
issn = "0894-9875",
publisher = "Plenum Press",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Why error-prone quantum measurements have outcomes

AU - Healey, Richard A

PY - 1993/2

Y1 - 1993/2

N2 - To solve the quantum measurement problem it is necessary to construct quantum mechanical models of measurement interactions to show why properly conducted measurements always yield definite outcomes. The main barrier to a solution has been the interpretive principle that a quantum system has a definite value for an observable only if it may be described by a quantum eigenstate of the corresponding operator. I have recently proposed a solution to the measurement problem based on alternative interpretive principles. The present paper defends this proposal against recent criticisms which seek to show that it fails to solve the problem unless quantum measurements meet highly idealized conditions which no actual measurement could hope to meet. Several models of error-prone measurements are shown to lead to definite outcomes, and a general defense of the appropriateness of these models is sketched.

AB - To solve the quantum measurement problem it is necessary to construct quantum mechanical models of measurement interactions to show why properly conducted measurements always yield definite outcomes. The main barrier to a solution has been the interpretive principle that a quantum system has a definite value for an observable only if it may be described by a quantum eigenstate of the corresponding operator. I have recently proposed a solution to the measurement problem based on alternative interpretive principles. The present paper defends this proposal against recent criticisms which seek to show that it fails to solve the problem unless quantum measurements meet highly idealized conditions which no actual measurement could hope to meet. Several models of error-prone measurements are shown to lead to definite outcomes, and a general defense of the appropriateness of these models is sketched.

KW - errorprone measurement

KW - measurement problem

KW - quantum measurement

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=21144482847&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=21144482847&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/BF00683108

DO - 10.1007/BF00683108

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:21144482847

VL - 6

SP - 37

EP - 54

JO - Foundations of Physics Letters

JF - Foundations of Physics Letters

SN - 0894-9875

IS - 1

ER -