Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1907.06240

'Two Dogmas' Redux

Jeffrey Bub

Published Jul 14, 2019• 1 citation
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

About ten years ago, Itamar Pitowsky and I wrote a paper, 'Two dogmas about quantum mechanics,' in which we outlined an information-theoretic interpretation of quantum mechanics as an alternative to the Everett interpretation. Here I revisit the paper and, following Frauchiger and Renner, I show that the Everett interpretation leads to modal contradictions in 'Wigner's-Friend'-type scenarios that involve 'encapsulated' measurements, where a super-observer (which could be a quantum automaton), with unrestricted ability to measure any arbitrary observable of a complex quantum system, measures the memory of an observer system (also possibly a quantum automaton) after that system measures the spin of a qubit. In this sense, the Everett interpretation is inconsistent.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1907.06240

Related papers

The information-theoretic view of quantum mechanics and the measurement problem(s)

Federico Laudisa

Abstract Until recently Jeffrey Bub and Itamar Pitowsky, in the framework of an information-theoretic view of quantum mechanics, claimed first that to the measurement problem in its ordinary formulation there correspond in effect two measurement problems (simply called the big and the small measurement problems), with a different degree of relevance and, second, that the analysis of a quantum measurement is a problem only if other assumptions – taken by Pitowsky and Bub to be unnecessary ‘dogmas’ – are assumed. Here I critically discuss this unconventional stance on the measurement problem and argue that the Bub-Pitowsky arguments are inconclusive, mainly because they rely on an unwarranted extension to the quantum realm of a distinction concerning the foundations of special relativity which is in itself rather controversial.

arXiv:2202.00510•European Journal for Philosophy of Science•Mar 29, 2023•2 citations

The Objectivity and Invariance of Quantum Predictions

Gordon N. Fleming

In a recent article Itamar Pitowsky (1991) has analyzed some measurement possibilities presented by an entangled state of three spin ½ particles. From that analysis he has concluded that the valid predictions of results of possible future measurements, made by observers who actually carry out mutually space-like separated measurements, can be incompatible with one another in the sense that their conjunction contradicts the quantum theory. From this result Pitowsky infers the inherently observer specific, or relative, character of quantum predictions as opposed to the results of actual observations or measurements, which, he claims, are covariant; i.e. (I take it) compatibly translatable from one observer to another.

PSA Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association•Jan 1, 1992•4 citations

Wigner's Friend Paradox: Quantum Measurement, Observation, and the Problem of Objectivity

Mirza Adnan Mohtashim

This paper offers a comprehensive analysis of Wigner’s Friend paradox (1961), a foundational thought experiment in quantum mechanics that highlights the tension between the internal perspective of a measuring observer (who experiences a definite outcome) and the external perspective of a super-observer who treats the entire laboratory as a quantum system in superposition. It traces the historical lineage from Schrödinger’s cat and von Neumann’s measurement theory, provides a formal mathematical description of the state evolution and logical structure of the paradox, examines implications for major interpretations of quantum mechanics (Copenhagen, Everettian many-worlds, QBism, relational quantum mechanics, and objective collapse theories), and discusses modern extensions such as the Frauchiger–Renner paradox. The work explores profound philosophical and epistemological consequences for the nature of observation, objectivity, intersubjectivity, and the role of consciousness in quantum theory (2026).

•May 29, 2026•0 citations

Two Dogmas About Quantum Mechanics

Jeffrey Bub, Itamar Pitowsky

Abstract This chapter argues that the intractable part of the measurement problem — the ‘big’ measurement problem — is a pseudo-problem that depends for its legitimacy on the acceptance of two dogmas. The first dogma is John Bell's assertion that measurement should never be introduced as a primitive process in a fundamental mechanical theory like classical or quantum mechanics, but should always be open to a complete analysis, in principle, of how the individual outcomes come about dynamically. The second dogma is the view that the quantum state has an ontological significance analogous to the significance of the classical state as the ‘truthmaker’ for propositions about the occurrence and non-occurrence of events, i.e., that the quantum state is a representation of physical reality. The chapter shows how both dogmas can be rejected in a realist information-theoretic interpretation of quantum mechanics as an alternative to the Everett interpretation. The Everettian, too, regards the ‘big’ measurement problem as a pseudo-problem, because the Everettian rejects the assumption that measurements have definite outcomes, in the sense that one particular outcome, as opposed to other possible outcomes, actually occurs in a quantum measurement process. By contrast with the Everettians, the chapter accepts that measurements have definite outcomes. By contrast with the Bohmians and the GRW ‘collapse’ theorists who add structure to the theory and propose dynamical solutions to the ‘big’ measurement problem, we take the problem to arise from the failure to see the significance of Hilbert space as a new kinematic framework for the physics of an indeterministic universe, in the sense that Hilbert space imposes kinematic (i.e., pre-dynamic) objective probabilistic constraints on correlations between events.

arXiv:0712.4258•Jun 24, 2010•117 citations

Rabid Dogma? Comments on Bub and Pitowsky

Christopher G. Timpson

Abstract The proposed interpretation, if it is to count as realism, must say more about the evolution of the state while the argument that more about its dynamics oughtn't to be said (given the no-broadcasting principle) is suggested to be unsound. Nor are the alleged dogmas of quantum mechanics dogmas — on the contrary, the fact that measurements cannot count as primitives is a consequence of realism, not a presupposition of it. And the parallel with special relativity cuts both ways: the dynamical explanations for the length contractions and time dilations demanded by Lorentz in special relativity must indeed be forthcoming, as Einstein later acknowledged. Finally, there is little in the proposed interpretation that is specifically information-theoretic.

•Jun 24, 2010•7 citations

The Contextual Modal Logic of a Wigner's Friend Generalization

Felipe Dilho Alves, João Carlos Alves Barata

Quantum mechanics has been subject to logical scrutiny since its inception. The behavior of quantum systems, which are fundamentally dissimilar from classical systems, often appears to point to a logical inconsistency in quantum mechanics, allegedly leading to contradictions in the prediction of experimental measurements--though such contradictions have never materialized. A recent example of this type of inquiry into the logical well-posedness of quantum mechanics is the Frauchiger-Renner Gedankenexperiment, which purports to demonstrate that quantum mechanics is logically inconsistent. In this article, we show that by considering the property of contextuality in quantum systems--as predicted by the Kochen-Specker theorem--the supposed contradiction proposed by Frauchiger and Renner becomes logically inaccessible.

math-phCross-listedarXiv:2603.29028•International Journal of Theoretical Physics•Apr 1, 2026•0 citations
About ten years ago, Itamar Pitowsky and I wrote a paper, 'Two dogmas about quantum mechanics,' in which we outlined an information-theoretic interpretation of quantum mechanics as an alternative to the Everett interpretation. Here I revisit the paper and, following Frauchiger and Renner, I show that the Everett interpretation leads to modal contradictions in 'Wigner's-Friend'-type scenarios that involve 'encapsulated' measurements, where a super-observer (which could be a quantum automaton), with unrestricted ability to measure any arbitrary observable of a complex quantum system, measures the memory of an observer system (also possibly a quantum automaton) after that system measures the spin of a qubit. In this sense, the Everett interpretation is inconsistent.
Abstract Until recently Jeffrey Bub and Itamar Pitowsky, in the framework of an information-theoretic view of quantum mechanics, claimed first that to the measurement problem in its ordinary formulation there correspond in effect two measurement problems (simply called the big and the small measurement problems), with a different degree of relevance and, second, that the analysis of a quantum measurement is a problem only if other assumptions – taken by Pitowsky and Bub to be unnecessary ‘dogmas’ – are assumed. Here I critically discuss this unconventional stance on the measurement problem and argue that the Bub-Pitowsky arguments are inconclusive, mainly because they rely on an unwarranted extension to the quantum realm of a distinction concerning the foundations of special relativity which is in itself rather controversial.
In a recent article Itamar Pitowsky (1991) has analyzed some measurement possibilities presented by an entangled state of three spin ½ particles. From that analysis he has concluded that the valid predictions of results of possible future measurements, made by observers who actually carry out mutually space-like separated measurements, can be incompatible with one another in the sense that their conjunction contradicts the quantum theory. From this result Pitowsky infers the inherently observer specific, or relative, character of quantum predictions as opposed to the results of actual observations or measurements, which, he claims, are covariant; i.e. (I take it) compatibly translatable from one observer to another.
This paper offers a comprehensive analysis of Wigner’s Friend paradox (1961), a foundational thought experiment in quantum mechanics that highlights the tension between the internal perspective of a measuring observer (who experiences a definite outcome) and the external perspective of a super-observer who treats the entire laboratory as a quantum system in superposition. It traces the historical lineage from Schrödinger’s cat and von Neumann’s measurement theory, provides a formal mathematical description of the state evolution and logical structure of the paradox, examines implications for major interpretations of quantum mechanics (Copenhagen, Everettian many-worlds, QBism, relational quantum mechanics, and objective collapse theories), and discusses modern extensions such as the Frauchiger–Renner paradox. The work explores profound philosophical and epistemological consequences for the nature of observation, objectivity, intersubjectivity, and the role of consciousness in quantum theory (2026).
Abstract This chapter argues that the intractable part of the measurement problem — the ‘big’ measurement problem — is a pseudo-problem that depends for its legitimacy on the acceptance of two dogmas. The first dogma is John Bell's assertion that measurement should never be introduced as a primitive process in a fundamental mechanical theory like classical or quantum mechanics, but should always be open to a complete analysis, in principle, of how the individual outcomes come about dynamically. The second dogma is the view that the quantum state has an ontological significance analogous to the significance of the classical state as the ‘truthmaker’ for propositions about the occurrence and non-occurrence of events, i.e., that the quantum state is a representation of physical reality. The chapter shows how both dogmas can be rejected in a realist information-theoretic interpretation of quantum mechanics as an alternative to the Everett interpretation. The Everettian, too, regards the ‘big’ measurement problem as a pseudo-problem, because the Everettian rejects the assumption that measurements have definite outcomes, in the sense that one particular outcome, as opposed to other possible outcomes, actually occurs in a quantum measurement process. By contrast with the Everettians, the chapter accepts that measurements have definite outcomes. By contrast with the Bohmians and the GRW ‘collapse’ theorists who add structure to the theory and propose dynamical solutions to the ‘big’ measurement problem, we take the problem to arise from the failure to see the significance of Hilbert space as a new kinematic framework for the physics of an indeterministic universe, in the sense that Hilbert space imposes kinematic (i.e., pre-dynamic) objective probabilistic constraints on correlations between events.
Abstract The proposed interpretation, if it is to count as realism, must say more about the evolution of the state while the argument that more about its dynamics oughtn't to be said (given the no-broadcasting principle) is suggested to be unsound. Nor are the alleged dogmas of quantum mechanics dogmas — on the contrary, the fact that measurements cannot count as primitives is a consequence of realism, not a presupposition of it. And the parallel with special relativity cuts both ways: the dynamical explanations for the length contractions and time dilations demanded by Lorentz in special relativity must indeed be forthcoming, as Einstein later acknowledged. Finally, there is little in the proposed interpretation that is specifically information-theoretic.
Quantum mechanics has been subject to logical scrutiny since its inception. The behavior of quantum systems, which are fundamentally dissimilar from classical systems, often appears to point to a logical inconsistency in quantum mechanics, allegedly leading to contradictions in the prediction of experimental measurements--though such contradictions have never materialized. A recent example of this type of inquiry into the logical well-posedness of quantum mechanics is the Frauchiger-Renner Gedankenexperiment, which purports to demonstrate that quantum mechanics is logically inconsistent. In this article, we show that by considering the property of contextuality in quantum systems--as predicted by the Kochen-Specker theorem--the supposed contradiction proposed by Frauchiger and Renner becomes logically inaccessible.