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

American Journal of Physics

Einstein's Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

L. E. Ballentine

Published Dec 1, 1972• 45 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Einstein's arguments concerning the interpretation of quantum mechanics are reviewed and contrasted with certain misconceptions regarding his attitude toward the theory. He considered Born's statistical interpretation to be the only satisfactory one, and he was not a supporter of hidden-variable theories such as that of Bohm. His criticism of the interpretation accepted, at least tacitly, by many physicists was that the quantum state function does not provide a description of an individual system but rather of an ensemble of similar systems. This criticism was not based merely upon his famous remark that God does not play dice, but upon some definite physical arguments which did not assume determinism.

DOI
10.1119/1.1987060

Related papers

The Statistical Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

L. E. Ballentine

The Statistical Interpretation of quantum theory is formulated for the purpose of providing a sound interpretation using a minimum of assumptions. Several arguments are advanced in favor of considering the quantum state description to apply only to an ensemble of similarily prepared systems, rather than supposing, as is often done, that it exhaustively represents an individual physical system. Most of the problems associated with the quantum theory of measurement are artifacts of the attempt to maintain the latter interpretation. The introduction of hidden variables to determine the outcome of individual events is fully compatible with the statistical predictions of quantum theory. However, a theorem due to Bell seems to require that any such hidden-variable theory which reproduces all of quantum mechanics exactly (i.e., not merely in some limiting case) must possess a rather pathological character with respect to correlated, but spacially separated, systems.

Reviews of Modern Physics•Oct 1, 1970•1,033 citations

- Mysteries in Quantum Mechanics

S. Rajasekar, R. Velusamy

Quantum theory is considered as the most successful scientific theory of all time. However, the understanding1 and interpretation of quantum theory has been subjected to a continuous debate since its formulation. A leading role was played by Einstein in the development of the old quantum theory but he was not impressed by the statistical interpretation of the quantum theory. He believed in a world of well defined law and order in which objectivity exists. He never thought that the new quantum theory as a complete theory. In 1926 in a letter to Max Born, Einstein wrote: Quantum mechanics is very impressive. ... The theory produces good deal but hardly brings us closer to the secret of the old one. I am at all events convinced that God does not play dice.

CRC Press eBooks•Dec 11, 2014•0 citations

Concerning Dice and Divinity

D. M. Appleby

Einstein initially objected to the probabilistic aspect of quantum mechanics—the idea that God is playing at dice. Later he changed his ground, and focussed instead on the point that the Copenhagen Interpretation leads to what Einstein saw as the abandonment of physical realism. We argue here that Einstein’s initial intuition was perfectly sound, and that it is precisely the fact that quantum mechanics is a fundamentally probabilistic theory which is at the root of all the controversies regarding its interpretation. Probability is an intrinsically logical concept. This means that the quantum state has an essentially logical significance. It is extremely difficult to reconcile that fact with Einstein’s belief, that it is the task of physics to give us a vision of the world apprehended sub specie aeternitatis. Quantum mechanics thus presents us with a simple choice: either to follow Einstein in looking for a theory which is not probabilistic at the fundamental level, or else to accept that physics does not in fact put us in the position of God looking down on things from above. There is a widespread fear that the latter alternative must inevitably lead to a greatly impoverished, positivistic view of physical theory. It appears to us, however, that the truth is just the opposite. The Einsteinian vision is much less attractive than it seems at first sight. In particular, it is closely connected with philosophical reductionism.

arXiv:quant-ph/0611261•AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2007•4 citations

Einstein’s Response to the New Dynamics

A. Pais

Abstract Everyone familiar with modern physics knows that Einstein’s attitude regarding quantum mechanics was one of skepticism. No biography of him fails to mention his saying that God does not throw dice. He was indeed given to such utterances (as I know from experience), and stronger ones, such as ‘It seems hard to look in God’s cards. But I cannot for a moment believe that He plays dice and makes use of “telepathic” means (as the current quantum theory alleges He does)’ [E1]. However, remarks such as these should not create the impression that Einstein had abandoned active interest in quantum problems in favor of his quest for a unified field theory. Far from it. In fact, even in the search for a unified theory, the quantum riddles were very much on his mind, as I shall discuss in Chapter

•Aug 25, 2005•0 citations

CONCERNING DICE AND DIVINITY

D M Appleby

Einstein initially objected to the probabilistic aspect of quantum mechanics— the idea that God is playing at dice. Later he changed his ground, and focussed instead on the point that the Copenhagen Interpretation leads to what Einstein saw as the abandonment of physical realism. We argue here that Einstein’s initial intuition was perfectly sound, and that it is precisely the fact that quantum mechanics is a fundamentally probabilistic theory which is at the root of all the controversies regarding its interpretation. Probability is an intrinsically logical concept. This means that the quantum state has an essentially logical significance. It is extremely difficult to reconcile that fact with Einstein’s belief, that it is the task of physics to give us a vision of the world apprehended sub specie aeternitatis. Quantum mechanics thus presents us with a simple choice: either to follow Einstein in looking for a theory which is not probabilistic at the fundamental level, or else to accept that physics does not in fact put us in the position of God looking down on things from above. There is a widespread fear that the latter alternative must inevitably lead to a greatly impoverished,

•Jan 1, 2006•5 citations

Einstein against quantum mechanics: randomness, ignorance and our ignorance about randomness

Juan Pablo Paz

Albert Einstein made fundamental contributions to the development of quantum mechanics. However, he was never satisfied with the quantum worldview. In fact, during most of his life he attempted to find inconsistencies and paradoxes within quantum mechanics. His famous quote "God does not play dice" shows how disturbing was to Einstein one of the most important aspects of quantum mechanics: non-determinism. In this paper we will present the basic concepts of quantum mechanics, we will describe Einstein's attempts to destroy it and we will discuss why we can nowadays state that, in this regard, Albert Einstein was not right.

arXiv:0705.4446•May 30, 2007•0 citations
Einstein's arguments concerning the interpretation of quantum mechanics are reviewed and contrasted with certain misconceptions regarding his attitude toward the theory. He considered Born's statistical interpretation to be the only satisfactory one, and he was not a supporter of hidden-variable theories such as that of Bohm. His criticism of the interpretation accepted, at least tacitly, by many physicists was that the quantum state function does not provide a description of an individual system but rather of an ensemble of similar systems. This criticism was not based merely upon his famous remark that God does not play dice, but upon some definite physical arguments which did not assume determinism.
The Statistical Interpretation of quantum theory is formulated for the purpose of providing a sound interpretation using a minimum of assumptions. Several arguments are advanced in favor of considering the quantum state description to apply only to an ensemble of similarily prepared systems, rather than supposing, as is often done, that it exhaustively represents an individual physical system. Most of the problems associated with the quantum theory of measurement are artifacts of the attempt to maintain the latter interpretation. The introduction of hidden variables to determine the outcome of individual events is fully compatible with the statistical predictions of quantum theory. However, a theorem due to Bell seems to require that any such hidden-variable theory which reproduces all of quantum mechanics exactly (i.e., not merely in some limiting case) must possess a rather pathological character with respect to correlated, but spacially separated, systems.
Quantum theory is considered as the most successful scientific theory of all time. However, the understanding1 and interpretation of quantum theory has been subjected to a continuous debate since its formulation. A leading role was played by Einstein in the development of the old quantum theory but he was not impressed by the statistical interpretation of the quantum theory. He believed in a world of well defined law and order in which objectivity exists. He never thought that the new quantum theory as a complete theory. In 1926 in a letter to Max Born, Einstein wrote: Quantum mechanics is very impressive. ... The theory produces good deal but hardly brings us closer to the secret of the old one. I am at all events convinced that God does not play dice.
Einstein initially objected to the probabilistic aspect of quantum mechanics—the idea that God is playing at dice. Later he changed his ground, and focussed instead on the point that the Copenhagen Interpretation leads to what Einstein saw as the abandonment of physical realism. We argue here that Einstein’s initial intuition was perfectly sound, and that it is precisely the fact that quantum mechanics is a fundamentally probabilistic theory which is at the root of all the controversies regarding its interpretation. Probability is an intrinsically logical concept. This means that the quantum state has an essentially logical significance. It is extremely difficult to reconcile that fact with Einstein’s belief, that it is the task of physics to give us a vision of the world apprehended sub specie aeternitatis. Quantum mechanics thus presents us with a simple choice: either to follow Einstein in looking for a theory which is not probabilistic at the fundamental level, or else to accept that physics does not in fact put us in the position of God looking down on things from above. There is a widespread fear that the latter alternative must inevitably lead to a greatly impoverished, positivistic view of physical theory. It appears to us, however, that the truth is just the opposite. The Einsteinian vision is much less attractive than it seems at first sight. In particular, it is closely connected with philosophical reductionism.
Abstract Everyone familiar with modern physics knows that Einstein’s attitude regarding quantum mechanics was one of skepticism. No biography of him fails to mention his saying that God does not throw dice. He was indeed given to such utterances (as I know from experience), and stronger ones, such as ‘It seems hard to look in God’s cards. But I cannot for a moment believe that He plays dice and makes use of “telepathic” means (as the current quantum theory alleges He does)’ [E1]. However, remarks such as these should not create the impression that Einstein had abandoned active interest in quantum problems in favor of his quest for a unified field theory. Far from it. In fact, even in the search for a unified theory, the quantum riddles were very much on his mind, as I shall discuss in Chapter
Einstein initially objected to the probabilistic aspect of quantum mechanics— the idea that God is playing at dice. Later he changed his ground, and focussed instead on the point that the Copenhagen Interpretation leads to what Einstein saw as the abandonment of physical realism. We argue here that Einstein’s initial intuition was perfectly sound, and that it is precisely the fact that quantum mechanics is a fundamentally probabilistic theory which is at the root of all the controversies regarding its interpretation. Probability is an intrinsically logical concept. This means that the quantum state has an essentially logical significance. It is extremely difficult to reconcile that fact with Einstein’s belief, that it is the task of physics to give us a vision of the world apprehended sub specie aeternitatis. Quantum mechanics thus presents us with a simple choice: either to follow Einstein in looking for a theory which is not probabilistic at the fundamental level, or else to accept that physics does not in fact put us in the position of God looking down on things from above. There is a widespread fear that the latter alternative must inevitably lead to a greatly impoverished,
Albert Einstein made fundamental contributions to the development of quantum mechanics. However, he was never satisfied with the quantum worldview. In fact, during most of his life he attempted to find inconsistencies and paradoxes within quantum mechanics. His famous quote "God does not play dice" shows how disturbing was to Einstein one of the most important aspects of quantum mechanics: non-determinism. In this paper we will present the basic concepts of quantum mechanics, we will describe Einstein's attempts to destroy it and we will discuss why we can nowadays state that, in this regard, Albert Einstein was not right.