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

Physics Letters A

Hypothesis on the foundation of stochastic interpretations of quantum mechanics

Junichiro Fukai

Published Feb 1, 1976• 2 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1016/0375-9601(76)90006-2

Related papers

The stochastic interpretation of quantum mechanics: A critical review

G. C. Ghirardi, C. Omero, A. Rimini +1 more

Rivista Del Nuovo Cimento•Mar 1, 1978•50 citations

An Appraisal of Stochastic Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics

Millard Baublitz

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 1997•1 citation

Stochastic Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

Mário J. de Oliveira

arXiv:2510.06418•Brazilian Journal of Physics•Mar 5, 2026•0 citations

The Stochastic Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics and the Theory of Measurement

Z. Marić, Dj. Živanović

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 1976•1 citation

The stochastic interpretation of quantum mechanics: A reply to Ghirardiet al.

E. Onofri

Lettere al nuovo cimento della societa italiana di fisica/Lettere al nuovo cimento•Feb 1, 1979•6 citations

Buonomano against Bell: Nonergodicity or nonlocality?

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

The aim of this note is to attract attention of the quantum foundational community to the fact that in Bell’s arguments, one cannot distinguish two hypotheses: (a) quantum mechanics is nonlocal, (b) quantum mechanics is nonergodic. Therefore, experimental violations of Bell’s inequality can be as well interpreted as supporting the hypothesis that stochastic processes induced by quantum measurements are nonergodic. The latter hypothesis was discussed actively by Buonomano since 1980. However, in contrast to Bell’s hypothesis on nonlocality, it did not attract so much attention. The only experiment testing the hypothesis on nonergodicity was performed in neutron interferometry (by Summhammer, in 1989). This experiment can be considered as rejecting this hypothesis. However, it cannot be considered as a decisive experiment. New experiments are badly needed. We point out that a nonergodic model can be realistic, i.e. the distribution of hidden (local!) variables is well-defined. We also discuss coupling of violation of the Bell inequality with violation of the condition of weak mixing for ergodic dynamical systems.

arXiv:quant-ph/0512178•International Journal of Quantum Information•Nov 29, 2017•9 citations
The aim of this note is to attract attention of the quantum foundational community to the fact that in Bell’s arguments, one cannot distinguish two hypotheses: (a) quantum mechanics is nonlocal, (b) quantum mechanics is nonergodic. Therefore, experimental violations of Bell’s inequality can be as well interpreted as supporting the hypothesis that stochastic processes induced by quantum measurements are nonergodic. The latter hypothesis was discussed actively by Buonomano since 1980. However, in contrast to Bell’s hypothesis on nonlocality, it did not attract so much attention. The only experiment testing the hypothesis on nonergodicity was performed in neutron interferometry (by Summhammer, in 1989). This experiment can be considered as rejecting this hypothesis. However, it cannot be considered as a decisive experiment. New experiments are badly needed. We point out that a nonergodic model can be realistic, i.e. the distribution of hidden (local!) variables is well-defined. We also discuss coupling of violation of the Bell inequality with violation of the condition of weak mixing for ergodic dynamical systems.