Physical Review A

Modal interpretation of quantum mechanics, measurements, and macroscopic behavior

Dennis Dieks

Published Apr 1, 1994• 73 citations

Abstract

The modal interpretation explained here construes the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics in terms of physical properties (``be-ables,'' ``existents'') in such a way that the property attribution reflects the mathematical structure as much as possible---no additional structure is superimposed on the formalism. We generalize the interpretation by specifying a dynamics of physical properties, and also extend it while replying to recent objections by Albert and Loewer 2 [Proceedings of the 1990 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, edited by A. Fine, M. Forbes, and L. Wessels (Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, MI, 1990), Vol. 1, p. 277], and by Elby [Found. Phys. Lett. 6, 5 (1993)]. I also discuss questions relating to relativistic aspects and casuality.

DOI: 10.1103/physreva.49.2290

Related papers

Properties, states, measurement outcomes and effective states

Pieter E. Vermaas

Starting with a more philosophical review, I discuss how modal interpretations describe reality. Firstly, it is shown that they describe states of affairs which need not be observable. Secondly, I underpin my position that in order to be metaphysically tenable, interpretations need only to satisfy the criteria of Consistency and Internal Completeness. Thirdly, I analyse how properties, states and measurement outcomes are related to one another within the modal descriptions of reality. Finally, I show how modal interpretations recover the standard formulation of quantum mechanics if one defines, in addition to the true states, so-called effective states of systems. Noumenal states of affairs The aim of an interpretation of quantum mechanics is, as I said in the introduction, to provide a description of what reality would be like if quantum mechanics were true. This formulation underlines two aspects of interpretations. Firstly, interpretations intend to construe quantum mechanics in terms of a description of reality and not merely in terms of the outcomes of measurements. Secondly, this description need not be correct. The objective is only to prove that there exists a construal of quantum mechanics which yields an acceptable description of reality. And because it is already difficult enough to give such a proof of existence, it is not (yet) the aim of interpretations to provide the one and only correct description of reality. The above formulation, however, disregards another aspect of interpretations of quantum mechanics, namely that they describe states of affairs which need not always be observable.

Cambridge University Press eBooksFeb 5, 20100 citations

A Philosopher's Understanding of Quantum Mechanics

Pieter E. Vermaas

This book is about how to understand quantum mechanics by means of a modal interpretation. Modal interpretations provide a general framework within which quantum mechanics can be considered as a theory that describes reality in terms of physical systems possessing definite properties. Quantum mechanics is standardly understood to be a theory about probabilities with which measurements have outcomes. Modal interpretations are relatively new attempts to present quantum mechanics as a theory which, like other physical theories, describes an observer-independent reality. In this book, Pieter Vermaas summarises the results of this work. The book will be of great value to undergraduates, graduate students and researchers in philosophy of science, and physics departments with an interest in learning about modal interpretations of quantum mechanics.

Cambridge University Press eBooksJan 1, 20007 citations

Philosophy

Pieter E. Vermaas

In this final part I analyse the modal interpretations from a more philosophical point of view. In Chapter 12 I start by arguing that modal interpretations describe noumenal states of affairs and that therefore metaphysically tenable interpretations need only to meet the criteria of Consistency and Internal Completeness. Then I analyse the relations between properties, states and outcomes of measurements in the modal description of reality. I end by discussing how modal interpretations, when restricted to the description of measurement outcomes, recover the standard formulation of quantum mechanics. Chapter 13 concerns the relations between the properties ascribed to composite systems and subsystems. I show that the property ascriptions of the bi and spectral modal interpretations can be characterised as holistic and non-reductionistic, whereas the property ascription of the atomic modal interpretation is non-holistic and to a large extent reductionistic. I argue that notwithstanding the lack of reductionism, the bi and spectral modal interpretations are empirically adequate and metaphysically tenable. I also discuss the possibility of saving the metaphysical tenability of the atomic modal interpretation by taking holistic properties as dispositional properties. In Chapter 14 I give a survey of the possibilities and impossibilities of modal interpretations and in Chapter 15 I end with general conclusions.

Cambridge University Press eBooksFeb 5, 20100 citations

Quantum Mechanical Quantities

John Forge

Light and magnetic and electrical phenomena were assumed to be explainable in mechanical terms. Representation of values possessed in terms of the states of the objects in question in classical physics is straightforward and intuitive: a state is just a ‘list’ of the quantities an object has, and the ‘degree’ which they are possessed, that evolves in accordance with an equation of motion. Dispersion is an attribute of a probability distribution, or more generally of a measure, and it indicates the way in which values spread on either side of the mean or ‘expectation value’. Relativisation to the preferred determinate observable gives rise to a class of n-tuples of relations, which people can think of as intantiations of ‘lawlike’ connections that always involve the preferred observable. Two alternative interpretations of quantum mechanics, the standard and the modal interpretation, were used to support this viewpoint.

Routledge eBooksAug 20, 20180 citations

Modal interpretations

Pieter E. Vermaas

Before considering the particulars of the different versions of the modal interpretation in the next chapter, I first present their common characteristics. Then I list the starting points from which I develop these modal interpretations to fully-fledged descriptions of reality. Finally, I give the criteria I think interpretations should meet and present a number of desiderata I hope they meet. General characteristics The name ‘modal interpretation’ originates with Van Fraassen (1972) who, in order to interpret quantum mechanics, transposed the semantic analysis of modal logics to the analysis of quantum logic. The resulting interpretation was for obvious reasons called the modal interpretation of quantum logic. Since then, the term modal interpretation has acquired a much more general meaning and lost its direct kinship with modal logics. In particular new interpretations of quantum mechanics developed in the 1980s by Kochen (1985), Krips (1987), Dieks (1988), Healey (1989) and Bub (1992) became known as modal interpretations and also older traditions like Bohmian mechanics (Bohm 1952; Bohm and Hiley 1993) were identified as modal ones. But why are all these interpretations still called modal? And what is the present-day meaning of this term? I think part of the answer to the first question has to do with public relations. The name ‘modal’ is short, sounds nice and is rather intriguing. Furthermore, I guess that also Van Fraassen's prestige as a philosopher of science adds a special gloss to the term. But, apart from all this, I believe the name ‘modal interpretation’ is quite suited.

Cambridge University Press eBooksFeb 5, 20100 citations

The formalisms and interpretations of quantum mechanics

Kefu Zhu

This chapter, based on the background information of the previous chapter, will review the formalism of quantum mechanics – its fundamental mathematical structure (the basic contents of Hilbert space representation and operator algebra representation) and physical assumptions (kinematics, dynamics, and measurement theory). These are the premise and foundation for discussing the quantum histories interpretation. Then, in combination with the viewpoints of some literature in recent years, we will explore what is the interpretation of quantum mechanics, analyze the relationship between the theory of quantum mechanics and its interpretation, and declare the author’s basic stance on these two issues. These two are the primary issues that all interpretive work in the philosophy of physics will face (not limited to the interpretation of quantum mechanics), and the necessary clarification here is also conducive to the subsequent discussion. Three common terms – theory, formalism, and interpretation – are explicated and differentiated by offering the necessary definitions of their meanings, based on the works of Acuña and Ruetsche. The clarification will help to make the subsequent related discussions more precise.

Routledge eBooksAug 22, 20250 citations