Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-dwq4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-04T06:37:14.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does the Bohm Theory Solve the Measurement Problem?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Abraham D. Stone
Abraham D. Stone*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy Harvard University
*
‡Send reprint requests to the author, Department of Philosophy, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

When classical mechanics is seen as the short-wavelength limit of quantum mechanics (i.e., as the limit of geometrical optics), it becomes clear just how serious and all-pervasive the measurement problem is. This formulation also leads us into the Bohm theory. But this theory has drawbacks: its nonuniqueness, in particular, and its nonlocality. I argue that these both reflect an underlying problem concerning information, which is actually a deeper version of the measurement problem itself.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 61 , Issue 2 , June 1994 , pp. 250 - 266
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 by the Philosophy of Science Association

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.)

Footnotes

†

I thank Bas van Fraassen for aid and encouragement in writing this paper. I am also indebted to Tim Maudlin and to other members of the quantum mechanics discussion group, which met in Princeton during the spring of 1992, for their clear formulations of the measurement problem and related issues.

References

Bohm, D. ([1952] 1983), “A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ‘Hidden’ Variables. Part I”, in J. A. Wheeler and W. H. Zurek (eds.), Quantum Theory and Measurement. (Originally published in Physical Review 85: 166–179.) Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 369–382.10.1103/PhysRev.85.166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brillouin, L. ([1938] 1964), Tensors in Mechanics and Elasticity. Translated by R. O. Brennan. Originally published as Les tenseurs en mécanique et en élasticité (Paris: Masson et cic) New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
De Witt, B. S. (1971), “The Many-Universes Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics”, in D'Espagnat, B. (ed.), Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. New York: Academic Press, pp. 211–262.Google Scholar
Dürr, D.; Goldstein, S.; and Zanghi, N. (1992), “Quantum Equilibrium and the Origin of Absolute Uncertainty”, Journal of Statistical Physics 67: 843–907.10.1007/BF01049004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Everett, H. (1957), “Relative State Formulations of Quantum Mechanics”, Reviews of Modern Physics 29: 454–462.10.1103/RevModPhys.29.454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, H. (1980), Classical Mechanics. 2d ed. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Saxon, S. D. (1968), Elementary Quantum Mechanics. San Francisco: Holden-Day.Google Scholar