aqora

The Measurement Problem in Quantum Mechanics Revisited

María Esther Burgos

InTech eBooksMay 13, 201511 citations

What Is a Quantum-Mechanical “Weak Value” the Value of?

B. E. Y. Svensson

A so called “weak value” of an observable in quantum mechanics (QM) may be obtained in a weak measurement + post-selection procedure on the QM system under study. Applied to number operators, it has been invoked in revisiting some QM paradoxes ( e.g. , the so called Three-Box Paradox and Hardy’s Paradox). This requires the weak value to be interpreted as a bona fide property of the system considered, a par with entities like operator mean values and eigenvalues. I question such an interpretation; it has no support in the basic axioms of quantum mechanics and it leads to unreasonable results in concrete situations.A so called “weak value” of an observable in quantum mechanics (QM) may be obtained in a weak measurement + post-selection procedure on the QM system under study. Applied to number operators, it has been invoked in revisiting some QM paradoxes ( e.g. , the so called Three-Box Paradox and Hardy’s Paradox). This requires the weak value to be interpreted as a bona fide property of the system considered, a par with entities like operator mean values and eigenvalues. I question such an interpretation; it has no support in the basic axioms of quantum mechanics and it leads to unreasonable results in concrete situations.

arXiv:1301.4328Foundations of PhysicsSep 4, 201327 citations

On the Quantum Mechanical Measurement Process

H. W. L. Naus

Foundations of PhysicsFeb 1, 202111 citations

Revisiting the Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics: From FAPP Solutions to Contextual Ontologies

Philippe Grangier

This note presents a concise and non-polemical comparison of several major interpretations of quantum mechanics, with a particular emphasis on the distinction between FAPP-solutions ("For All Practical Purposes'') versus ontological solutions to the measurement problem. Building on this distinction, we argue that the Contexts-Systems-Modalities (CSM) framework, supplemented by the operator-algebraic description of macroscopic contexts, provides a conceptually complete, non-FAPP ontology that naturally incorporates irreversibility and the physical structure of measurement devices. This approach differs significantly from other ontological interpretations such as Bohmian mechanics, spontaneous collapse, or many-worlds, and highlights the major role of contextual quantization in shaping quantum theory.This note presents a concise and non-polemical comparison of several major interpretations of quantum mechanics, with a particular emphasis on the distinction between FAPP-solutions ("For All Practical Purposes'') versus ontological solutions to the measurement problem. Building on this distinction, we argue that the Contexts-Systems-Modalities (CSM) framework, supplemented by the operator-algebraic description of macroscopic contexts, provides a conceptually complete, non-FAPP ontology that naturally incorporates irreversibility and the physical structure of measurement devices. This approach differs significantly from other ontological interpretations such as Bohmian mechanics, spontaneous collapse, or many-worlds, and highlights the major role of contextual quantization in shaping quantum theory.

quant-pharXiv:2601.20488Jan 29, 20260 citations

On measurements in quantum mechanics

Bartel Leenert van der Waerden

Zeitschrift für PhysikJun 1, 19661 citation

‘Measurement of Quantum Mechanical Operators ’ Revisited

Leon Loveridge, Paul Busch

The Wigner-Araki-Yanase (WAY) theorem states a remarkable limitation to quantum mechanical measurements in the presence of additive conserved quantities. Discovered by Wigner in 1952, this limitation is known to induce constraints on the control of individual quantum systems in the context of information processing. It is therefore important to understand the precise conditions and scope of the WAY theorem. Here we elucidate its crucial assumptions, briefly review some generalizations, and show how a particular extension can already be obtained by a simple modification of the original proofs. We also describe the evolution of the WAY theorem from a strict no-go verdict for certain, highly idealized, precise measurements into a quantitative constraint on the accuracy and approximate repeatability of imprecise measurements.The Wigner-Araki-Yanase (WAY) theorem states a remarkable limitation to quantum mechanical measurements in the presence of additive conserved quantities. Discovered by Wigner in 1952, this limitation is known to induce constraints on the control of individual quantum systems in the context of information processing. It is therefore important to understand the precise conditions and scope of the WAY theorem. Here we elucidate its crucial assumptions, briefly review some generalizations, and show how a particular extension can already be obtained by a simple modification of the original proofs. We also describe the evolution of the WAY theorem from a strict no-go verdict for certain, highly idealized, precise measurements into a quantitative constraint on the accuracy and approximate repeatability of imprecise measurements.

Aug 16, 201648 citations

‘Measurement of quantum mechanical operators’ revisited

Related papers

‘Measurement of quantum mechanical operators’ revisited

Related papers