Can the two-time interpretation of quantum mechanics solve the measurement problem?

Robertson, Katie

doi:10.1016/j.shpsb.2016.12.001

Cited by 6 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the end of each trial, the experimenter identifies the real path followed by the system, path = {Q L m L ... ← Q m ... ← Q 0 n 0 }, and increases by 1 the count in the corresponding part of their inventory, K(path) → K(path) + 1. After K >> 1 trials, the ratios K(path)/K will approach the probabilities in Equation (6), from which all the quantities of interest, such as averages or correlations, can be obtained later.…”

Section: The Need For Records Unbroken Unitary Evolutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unitary Evolution and Elements of Reality in Consecutive Quantum Measurements

Sokolovski

2022

Entropy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Probabilities of the outcomes of consecutive quantum measurements can be obtained by construction probability amplitudes, thus implying the unitary evolution of the measured system, broken each time a measurement is made. In practice, the experimenter needs to know all past outcomes at the end of the experiment, and that requires the presence of probes carrying the corresponding records. With this in mind, we consider two different ways to extend the description of a quantum system beyond what is actually measured and recorded. One is to look for quantities whose values can be ascertained without altering the existing probabilities. Such “elements of reality” can be found, yet they suffer from the same drawback as their EPR counterparts. The probes designed to measure non-commuting operators frustrate each other if set up to work jointly, so no simultaneous values of such quantities can be established consistently. The other possibility is to investigate the system’s response to weekly coupled probes. Such weak probes are shown either to reduce to a small fraction the number of cases where the corresponding values are still accurately measured, or lead only to the evaluation of the system’s probability amplitudes, or their combinations. It is difficult, we conclude, to see in quantum mechanics anything other than a formalism for predicting the likelihoods of the recorded outcomes of actually performed observations.

show abstract

Section: The Need For Records Unbroken Unitary Evolutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unitary Evolution and Elements of Reality in Consecutive Quantum Measurements

Sokolovski

2022

Entropy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For simplicity, we let the last operator have non-degenerate eigenvalues, M L = N . By (6), the probability to have an outcome…”

Section: The Need For Records Unbroken Unitary Evolutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Secondly, one can ask if the rules can be explained further? There have been proposals of "new physics" based on such concepts as time symmetry, weak measurements, and weak values (see [4] - [6], and Refs. therein).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unitary evolution and elements of reality in consecutive quantum measurements

Sokolovski

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Probabilities of the outcomes of consecutive quantum measurements can be obtained by construction probability amplitudes, thus implying unitary evolution of the measured system, broken each time a measurement is made. In practice, the experimenter needs to know all past outcomes at the end of the experiment, and that requires the presence of probes carrying the corresponding records. In this picture a composite system+probes can be seen to undergo an unbroken unitary evolution until the end of the trial, where the state of the probes is examined. For these two descriptions to agree one requires a particular type of coupling between a probe and the system, which we discuss in some details. With this in mind, we consider two different ways to extend the description of a quantum system's past beyond what is actually measured and recorded. One is to look for quantities whose values can be ascertained without altering the existing probabilities.Such "elements of reality" can be found, yet they suffer from the same drawback as their EPR counterparts. The probes designed to measure non-commuting operators frustrate each other if set up to work jointly, so no simultaneous values of such quantities can be established consistently.The other possibility is to investigate the system's response to weekly coupled probes. Such weak probes are shown either to reduce to a small fraction the number of cases where the corresponding values are still accurately measured, or lead only to the evaluation of the system's probability amplitudes, or their combinations. It is difficult, we conclude, to see in quantum mechanics anything other than a formalism for predicting the likelihoods of the recorded outcomes of actually performed observations.

show abstract

“…Gell-Mann and Hartle also contributed to this subject [8] and include a review of some previous work. Finally, Aharonov et al [9,10] proposed that this could solve the measurement problem of quantum mechanics, although this is disputed [11]. See also Appendix B.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%