Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T03:47:21.053Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Ignorance Interpretation Defended

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Neal Grossman
Neal Grossman*
Affiliation:
University of Illinois at Chicago Circle
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The “Ignorance Interpretation” of quantum mechanical mixtures holds, roughly, that whenever a system S belongs to an ensemble, which is represented by a mixed statistical operator U = Σpi P[ψi] (0 ≤ pi ≤ 1, Σipi = 1, P[ψi] is the projection operator for the state ψi), then S is in some pure state, although we are ignorant as to which one. It has been concluded, e.g. by van Fraassen, that “the ignorance interpretation is untenable,” and he presumably favors adopting “the position that mixtures of pure states are themselves new states ... to say that a system is in a proper mixture is to say that it is not in a pure state.” I wish to argue in this paper that there are no good grounds for rejecting the ignorance interpretation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 41 , Issue 4 , December 1974 , pp. 333 - 344
Copyright
Copyright © 1974 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.)

References

REFERENCES

[1] Cartwright, N. “A Philosophical Analysis of the Concept of Mixture in Quantum Mechanics.” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois at Chicago Circle, 1971.)Google Scholar
[2] Feynman, R. P., et al. The Feynman Lectures on Physics. Vol. III. Addison Wesley, 1965.Google Scholar
[3] Hooker, C. A. “The Nature of Quantum Mechanical Reality.” in Paradigms and Paradoxes. Edited by Colodny, R. Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press, 1972.Google Scholar
[4] Park, J. “Quantum Theoretical Concepts of Measurement: Part I.” Philosophy of Science 35 (1968): 205–231.10.1086/288210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5] Van Fraassen, B. C. “A Formal Approach to the Philosophy of Science.” in Paradigms and Paradoxes. Edited by Colodny, R. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1972.Google Scholar