Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-5lx2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-29T11:30:55.244Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Rise and Fall of Time-Symmetrized Quantum Mechanics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

W. David Sharp  and
Niall Shanks
W. David Sharp*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Alberta
Niall Shanks*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, East Tennessee State University
*
†Send reprint requests to W. David Sharp, Department of Philosophy, 4–108 Humanities Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton, T6G 2E5, Canada.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the context of a discussion of time symmetry in the quantum mechanical measurement process, Aharonov et al. (1964) derived an expression concerning probabilities for the outcomes of measurements conducted on systems which have been pre- and postselected on the basis of both preceding and succeeding measurements. Recent literature has claimed that a resulting “time-symmetrized” interpretation of quantum mechanics has significant implications for some basic issues, such as contextuality and determinateness, in elementary, nonrelativistic quantum mechanics. Bub and Brown (1986) have shown that under the standard interpretation of the aforementioned expression, these claims employ ensembles which are not well defined. It is argued here that under a counterfactual interpretation of the expression, these claims may be understood as employing well-defined ensembles; it is shown, however, that such an interpretation cannot be reconciled with the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 60 , Issue 3 , September 1993 , pp. 488 - 499
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1993

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

Aharonov, Y. and Albert, D. Z. (1984), “Is the Usual Notion of Time Evolution Adequate for Quantum Mechanical Systems?” Physical Review D: 223–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aharonov, Y. and Albert, D. Z. (1987), “The Issue of Retrodiction in Bohm's Theory”, in Hiley, B. J. and Peat, F. D. (eds.), Quantum Implications. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 224–226.Google Scholar
Aharonov, Y.; Bergmann, P. G.; and Lebowitz, J. L. (1964), “Time Symmetry in the Quantum Process of Measurement”, Physical Review B 134: 1410–1416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albert, D. Z.; Aharonov, Y.; and D'Amato, S. (1985), “Curious New Statistical Prediction of Quantum Mechanics”, Physical Review Letters 54: 5–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bell, J. S. (1964), “On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox”, Physics 1: 195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bub, J. and Brown, H. (1986), “Curious Properties of Quantum Ensembles which have been Both Preselected and Post-Selected”, Physical Review Letters 56: 2337–2340.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fine, A. (1982), “Antinomies of Entanglement: The Puzzling Case of the Tangled Statistics”, Journal of Philosophy 79: 733–747.Google Scholar
Heisenberg, W. (1930), The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hu, W. (1990), “The Curious Quantum Mechanics of Pre- and Post-Selected Ensembles”, Foundations of Physics 20: 447–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kochen, S. and Specker, E. P. (1967), “The Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics”, Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics 17: 59–87.Google Scholar
Sharp, W. D. and Shanks, N. (1989), “The Curious Quantum Statistics in the Interval Between Measurements”, Physics Letters A 138: 451–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar