Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-ws8qp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-29T04:51:40.563Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

17 - A Closed-System Approach to Decoherence

from Part V - The Relationship between the Quantum Ontology and the Classical World

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2019

Olimpia Lombardi
Affiliation:
Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina
Sebastian Fortin
Affiliation:
Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina
Cristian López
Affiliation:
Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina
Federico Holik
Affiliation:
Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Argentina
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Quantum Worlds
Perspectives on the Ontology of Quantum Mechanics
, pp. 345 - 359
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ardenghi, J. S., Castagnino, M., and Lombardi, O. (2009). “Quantum mechanics: Modal interpretation and Galilean transformations,” Foundations of Physics, 39: 10231045.Google Scholar
Arsenijević, M., Jeknić-Dugić, J., and Dugić, M. (2016). “A top-down versus a bottom-up hidden-variables description of the Stern-Gerlach experiment,” pp. 469484 in Kastner, R. E., Jeknić-Dugić, J., and Jaroszkiewicz, G. (eds.), Quantum Structural Studies: Classical Emergence from the Quantum Level. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar
Bacciagaluppi, G. (2016). “The role of decoherence in quantum mechanics,” in Zalta, E. N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2016 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2016/entries/qm-decoherence/Google Scholar
Bacciagaluppi, G. and Dickson, M. (1999). “Dynamics for modal interpretations,” Foundations of Physics, 29: 11651201.Google Scholar
Balachandran, A. P., Govindarajan, T. R., de Queiroz, A. R., and Reyes-Lega, A. F. (2013a). “Algebraic approach to entanglement and entropy,” Physical Review A, 88: 022301.Google Scholar
Balachandran, A. P., Govindarajan, T. R., de Queiroz, A. R., and Reyes-Lega, A. F. (2013b). “Entanglement and particle identity: A unifying approach,” Physical Review Letters, 110: 080503CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnum, H., Knill, E., Ortiz, G., Somma, R., and Viola, L. (2003). “Generalizations of entanglement based on coherent states and convex sets,” Physical Review A, 68: 032308.Google Scholar
Barnum, H., Knill, E., Ortiz, G., Somma, R., and Viola, L. (2004). “A subsystem-independent generalization of entanglement,” Physical Review Letters, 92: 107902.Google Scholar
Bratteli, O., and Robinson, D. W. (1987). Operator algebras and quantum statistical mechanics 1, 2nd edition. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Bub, J. (1997). Interpreting the Quantum World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Calzetta, E., Hu, B. L., and Mazzitelli, F. (2001). “Coarse-grained effective action and renormalization group theory in semiclassical gravity and cosmology,” Physics Reports, 352: 459520.Google Scholar
Castagnino, M. and Fortin, S. (2011). “New bases for a general definition for the moving preferred basis,” Modern Physics Letters A, 26: 23652373.Google Scholar
Castagnino, M., Fortin, S., and Lombardi, O. (2010). “Suppression of decoherence in a generalization of the spin-bath model,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 43: 065304.Google Scholar
Castagnino, M., Laura, R., and Lombardi, O. (2007). “A general conceptual framework for decoherence in closed and open systems,” Philosophy of Science, 74: 968980.Google Scholar
Castagnino, M. and Lombardi, O. (2005). “Decoherence time in self-induced decoherence,” Physical Review A, 72: 012102.Google Scholar
da Costa, N. and Lombardi, O. (2014). “Quantum mechanics: Ontology without individuals,” Foundations of Physics, 44: 12461257.Google Scholar
da Costa, N., Lombardi, O., and Lastiri, M. (2013). “A modal ontology of properties for quantum mechanics,” Synthese, 190: 36713693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daneri, A., Loinger, A., and Prosperi, G. (1962). “Quantum theory of measurement and ergodicity conditions,” Nuclear Physics, 33: 297319.Google Scholar
Earman, J. (2015). “Some puzzles and unresolved issues about quantum entanglement,” Erkenntnis, 80: 303337.Google Scholar
Elby, A. (1994). “The ‘decoherence’ approach to the measurement problem in quantum mechanics,” Proceedings of the 1994 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 1: 355365.Google Scholar
Fortin, S. and Lombardi, O. (2014). “Partial traces in decoherence and in interpretation: What do reduced states refer to?”, Foundations of Physics, 44: 426446.Google Scholar
Fortin, S., Lombardi, O., and Castagnino, M. (2014). “Decoherence: A closed-system approach,” Brazilian Journal of Physics, 44: 138153.Google Scholar
Haag, R. (1992). Local Quantum Physics: Fields, Particles, Algebras. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harshman, N. (2016). “Symmetry and natural quantum structures for three-particles in one-dimension,” pp. 373400 in Kastner, R. E., Jeknić-Dugić, J., and Jaroszkiewicz, G. (eds.), Quantum Structural Studies: Classical Emergence from the Quantum Level. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar
Harshman, N. and Ranade, K. (2011). “Observables can be tailored to change the entanglement of any pure state,” Physical Review A, 84: 012303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harshman, N. and Wickramasekara, S. (2007a). “Galilean and dynamical invariance of entanglement in particle scattering,” Physical Review Letters, 98: 080406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harshman, N. and Wickramasekara, S. (2007b). “Tensor product structures, entanglement, and particle scattering,” Open Systems & Information Dynamics, 14: 341351.Google Scholar
Healey, R. (1995). “Dissipating the quantum measurement problem,” Topoi, 14: 5565.Google Scholar
Jeknić-Dugić, J., Arsenijević, M., and Dugić, M. (2013). Quantum Structures: A View of the Quantum World. Saarbrücken: Lambert Academic Publishing.Google Scholar
Lombardi, O. and Castagnino, M. (2008). “A modal-Hamiltonian interpretation of quantum mechanics,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 39: 380443.Google Scholar
Lombardi, O., Castagnino, M., and Ardenghi, J. S. (2010). “The modal-Hamiltonian interpretation and the Galilean covariance of quantum mechanics,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 41: 93103.Google Scholar
Lombardi, O. and Dieks, D. (2016). “Particles in a quantum ontology of properties,” pp. 123143 in Bigaj, T. and Wüthrich, C. (eds.), Metaphysics in Contemporary Physics. Leiden: Brill-Rodopi.Google Scholar
Lombardi, O., Fortin, S., and Castagnino, M. (2012). “The problem of identifying the system and the environment in the phenomenon of decoherence,” pp. 161174 in de Regt, H. W., Hartmann, S., and Okasha, S. (eds.), Philosophical Issues in the Sciences Vol. 3. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Lychkovskiy, O. (2013). “Dependence of decoherence-assisted classicality on the way a system is partitioned into subsystems,” Physical Review A, 87: 022112.Google Scholar
Paz, J. P. and Zurek, W. H. (2002). “Environment-induced decoherence and the transition from quantum to classical,” pp. 77148, in Heiss, D. (ed.), Fundamentals of Quantum Information: Quantum Computation, Communication, Decoherence and All That. Heidelberg-Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Schlosshauer, M. (2007). Decoherence and the Quantum-to-Classical Transition. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Schrödinger, E. (1935). “Discussion of probability relations between separated systems,” Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 31: 555563.Google Scholar
van Kampen, N. G. (1954). “Quantum statistics of irreversible processes,” Physica, 20: 603622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viola, L. and Barnum, H. (2010). “Entanglement and subsystems, entanglement beyond subsystems, and all that,” pp. 1643 in Bokulich, A. and Jaeger, G. (eds.), Philosophy of Quantum Information and Entanglement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viola, L., Barnum, H., Knill, E., Ortiz, G., and Somma, R. (2005). “Entanglement beyond subsystems,” Contemporary Mathematics, 381: 117130.Google Scholar
Zurek, W. H. (1982). “Environment-induced superselection rules,” Physical Review D, 26: 18621880.Google Scholar
Zurek, W. H. (1993). “Preferred states, predictability, classicality and the environment-induced decoherence,” Progress of Theoretical Physics, 89: 281312.Google Scholar
Zurek, W. H. (1998). “Decoherence, einselection, and the existential interpretation,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 356: 17931820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zurek, W. H. (2000). “Decoherence and einselection,” pp. 309342 in Blanchard, P., Giulini, D., Joos, E., Kiefer, C., and Stamatescu, I.-O. (eds.), Decoherence: Theoretical, Experimental, and Conceptual Problems. Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Zurek, W. H. (2003). “Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical,” Reviews of Modern Physics, 75: 715776.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×