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

Erkenntnis

On the formal connection of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen argument to quantum mechanics and reality

Daniel Schoch

Published Sep 1, 1988• 0 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/bf00227856

Related papers

The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen physical reality is completely described by quantum mechanics

Don Nelson Page

Physics Letters A•Aug 1, 1982•54 citations

Is the physical reality criterion necessary for the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen argument?

Mehmet Ali Kuntman

Physics Letters A•Feb 1, 1988•0 citations

Decay of a compound particle and the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen argument

J. Flores, Enrique Henestroza, Pier A. Mello +1 more

By analyzing the decay of a compound system into two praticles, we show that measurements on particle 1 will define with an arbitrary degree of precision the coordinate and momenta of particle 2 at times large compared with the lifetime of the compound system, i.e., when the two particles no longer interact. Thus we have an example of the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen argument in which all the requirements of quantum mechanics are met. Criticism of the point of view they present should then center on their epistemological position (such as their definition of physical reality) rather than on their use of the quantum-mechanical formalism.

American Journal of Physics•Jan 1, 1981•3 citations

On the relation between the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox and the problem of nonlocality in quantum mechanics

Willem M. de Muynck

Foundations of Physics•Oct 1, 1986•6 citations

The Nature of Reality: Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Argument in Quantum Mechanics

Michele Caponigro

From conceptual point of view, we argue about the nature of reality inferred from EPR argument in quantum mechanics.

Prespacetime journal•Feb 1, 2019•0 citations

Is the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox Demanded by Quantum Mechanics?

Oreste Piccioni, Peter Bowles, C. Enscoe +2 more

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 1985•5 citations
By analyzing the decay of a compound system into two praticles, we show that measurements on particle 1 will define with an arbitrary degree of precision the coordinate and momenta of particle 2 at times large compared with the lifetime of the compound system, i.e., when the two particles no longer interact. Thus we have an example of the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen argument in which all the requirements of quantum mechanics are met. Criticism of the point of view they present should then center on their epistemological position (such as their definition of physical reality) rather than on their use of the quantum-mechanical formalism.