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 World

No bridge across the quantum rift

Tony Leggett

Published Jul 1, 1993• 1 citation
Publisher

Abstract

The last decade has seen a proliferation of books which attempt to explain the conceptual paradoxes of quantum mechanics in a non-technical way. This latest contribution, by David Albert, professor of philosophy at Columbia University, is brash, readable, provocative and at times breathtakingly naive and ill-informed. It will probably cause mild apoplexy, for both good reasons and bad, in a sizeable fraction of the professional quantum measurement community.

DOI
10.1088/2058-7058/6/7/41

Related papers

Conclusions

George Jaroszkiewicz

In the Preface to this book, we started with Alice and Bob having very different views of their observations. Alice used an optical telescope and reported nothing unusual about a distant galaxy that she could see. Bob, on the other hand, detected intense radio activity in that galaxy. Our question was: who has the true view of that galaxy? We advised the reader that the answer is not Alice . Neither is it Bob . The answer is not both of them , nor is it neither of them . It is not a trick question either. So what is the answer that this book would supply? Our answer will come presently. While this book has set forth a definite mathematical perspective on empirical physics, it has contained quite a lot of commentary that might be disparaged as metaphysics or philosophy. Such commentary is generally frowned on in science, because it has no empirical content. It is vacuous. In our defense, we point out the obvious: science is not a robotic activity; it is carried out by humans and these are driven by their metaphysical, philosophical, and emotional imperatives. For instance, the hard-core scientific view that quantum theory needs no interpretation but only application is itself a philosophy. It is no more than a conditioned response, based on opinion and subscription to current scientific norms. It is, indeed, a philosophy of how to do quantum mechanics. So we all do it, in one way or another. Our concern in this book is that the way that we do it should be based soundly on scientific principles. The quantized detector approach that we describe and use in this book is our attempt to do just that. There is an excellent paper on all of this that has the provocative title “Quantum Theory Needs No Interpretation,” by Fuchs and Peres (2000). It seems on the face of it to dismiss any sort of “interpretation” of quantum mechanics. In fact, close reading of it confirms (to us at least) the agenda that we have set out in this book. Yes, quantum mechanics needs no interpretation, when it is being applied to processes that take place in the information void .

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Nov 28, 2017•0 citations

Against “Paradoxes”: A New Quantum Philosophy for Quantum Mechanics

Claudio Garola

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 1999•9 citations

The Probability Map of the Universe

David Albert’s 2000 book Time and Chance attempts to account for some of the most intractable problems in theoretical physics, in particular those arising from the direction of time. This collection assembles essays exploring and debating Albert’s ideas, now recognized as among the most important recent contributions to the philosophy of science.

Harvard University Press eBooks•Nov 9, 2022•7 citations

A Criticism of Fine's Solution to the Quantum Measurement Problem: A New Epistemology for Quantum Mechanics

E. Conte

Physics Essays•Mar 1, 1996•4 citations

Foreword

Emmanuel E. Haven, Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

This new book by Emmanuel Haven and Andrei Khrennikov argues that information processing in social systems can to a degree be formalized with the mathematical apparatus of quantum mechanics. This is a novel approach. Understanding decision making is a central objective of economics and finance and the quantum like approach proposed here, is used as a tool to enrich the formalism of such decision making. Emmanuel and Andrei argue for instance that probability interference can be used to explain the violation of the law of total probability in well known paradoxes like the Ellsberg decision making paradox. Emmanuel and Andrei's book forms one of the very first contributions in a very novel area of research. I hope this book can open the road for many new books to come. More new results are needed, especially in the area of decision making. H. Eugene Stanley William Fairfield Warren Distinguished Professor; Professor of Physics; Professor of Chemistry; Professor of Biomedical Engineering; Professor of Physiology (School of Medicine) Director, Center for Polymer Studies, Department of Physics, Boston University By chance a few days before Andrei Khrennikov and Emmanuel Haven asked me to write this Foreword to their new book Quantum Social Science , I was browsing the collected works of Wolfgang Pauli, Writings on Physics and Philosophy , eds. Charles P. Enz and Karl von Meyenn, Springer (1994).

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Jan 17, 2013•0 citations

John Bell: Recollections of a Great Scientist and a Great Man

G. C. Ghirardi

Introduction This contribution to the book in honour of J. S. Bell will probably differ from the remaining ones, in particular since only a part of it will be devoted to specific technical arguments. In fact I have considered it appropriate to share with the community of physicists interested in the foundational problems of our best theory the repeated interactions I had with him in the last four years of his life, the deep discussions in which we have been involved in particular in connection with the elaboration of collapse theories and their interpretation, and the contributions he gave to the development of this approach at a formal level, as well as championing it on repeated occasions. In brief, I intend to play here the role of one of those lucky persons who became acquainted with him personally, who has exchanged important views with him, who has learned a lot from his deep insight and conceptual lucidity, and, last but not least, whose scientific work has been appreciated by him. Moreover, due to the fact that this book intends to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the derivation of the fundamental inequality which bears his name, I will also devote a small part of the text to recalling his clearcut views about the locality issue, views that I believe have not been grasped correctly by a remarkable part of the scientific community. I will analyze this problem in quite general terms at the end of the paper. Some of Bell's Scientific Achievements Bell received bachelor's degrees in experimental physics and in mathematical physics at Queen'sUniversity of Belfast in the years 1948 and 1949, respectively, and a PhD in physics at the University of Birmingham. We all know very well that already at that time he was absolutely unsatisfied with the conceptual structure of quantum mechanics and with the way in which it was taught. This is significantly expressed by the statement he made during an interview to Jeremy Bernstein: I remember arguing with one of my professors, a Doctor Sloane, about that. I was getting very heated and accusing him, more or less, of dishonesty. He was getting very heated too and said, ‘You're going too far.’

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Aug 31, 2016•1 citation
The last decade has seen a proliferation of books which attempt to explain the conceptual paradoxes of quantum mechanics in a non-technical way. This latest contribution, by David Albert, professor of philosophy at Columbia University, is brash, readable, provocative and at times breathtakingly naive and ill-informed. It will probably cause mild apoplexy, for both good reasons and bad, in a sizeable fraction of the professional quantum measurement community.
In the Preface to this book, we started with Alice and Bob having very different views of their observations. Alice used an optical telescope and reported nothing unusual about a distant galaxy that she could see. Bob, on the other hand, detected intense radio activity in that galaxy. Our question was: who has the true view of that galaxy? We advised the reader that the answer is not Alice . Neither is it Bob . The answer is not both of them , nor is it neither of them . It is not a trick question either. So what is the answer that this book would supply? Our answer will come presently. While this book has set forth a definite mathematical perspective on empirical physics, it has contained quite a lot of commentary that might be disparaged as metaphysics or philosophy. Such commentary is generally frowned on in science, because it has no empirical content. It is vacuous. In our defense, we point out the obvious: science is not a robotic activity; it is carried out by humans and these are driven by their metaphysical, philosophical, and emotional imperatives. For instance, the hard-core scientific view that quantum theory needs no interpretation but only application is itself a philosophy. It is no more than a conditioned response, based on opinion and subscription to current scientific norms. It is, indeed, a philosophy of how to do quantum mechanics. So we all do it, in one way or another. Our concern in this book is that the way that we do it should be based soundly on scientific principles. The quantized detector approach that we describe and use in this book is our attempt to do just that. There is an excellent paper on all of this that has the provocative title “Quantum Theory Needs No Interpretation,” by Fuchs and Peres (2000). It seems on the face of it to dismiss any sort of “interpretation” of quantum mechanics. In fact, close reading of it confirms (to us at least) the agenda that we have set out in this book. Yes, quantum mechanics needs no interpretation, when it is being applied to processes that take place in the information void .
This new book by Emmanuel Haven and Andrei Khrennikov argues that information processing in social systems can to a degree be formalized with the mathematical apparatus of quantum mechanics. This is a novel approach. Understanding decision making is a central objective of economics and finance and the quantum like approach proposed here, is used as a tool to enrich the formalism of such decision making. Emmanuel and Andrei argue for instance that probability interference can be used to explain the violation of the law of total probability in well known paradoxes like the Ellsberg decision making paradox. Emmanuel and Andrei's book forms one of the very first contributions in a very novel area of research. I hope this book can open the road for many new books to come. More new results are needed, especially in the area of decision making. H. Eugene Stanley William Fairfield Warren Distinguished Professor; Professor of Physics; Professor of Chemistry; Professor of Biomedical Engineering; Professor of Physiology (School of Medicine) Director, Center for Polymer Studies, Department of Physics, Boston University By chance a few days before Andrei Khrennikov and Emmanuel Haven asked me to write this Foreword to their new book Quantum Social Science , I was browsing the collected works of Wolfgang Pauli, Writings on Physics and Philosophy , eds. Charles P. Enz and Karl von Meyenn, Springer (1994).
Introduction This contribution to the book in honour of J. S. Bell will probably differ from the remaining ones, in particular since only a part of it will be devoted to specific technical arguments. In fact I have considered it appropriate to share with the community of physicists interested in the foundational problems of our best theory the repeated interactions I had with him in the last four years of his life, the deep discussions in which we have been involved in particular in connection with the elaboration of collapse theories and their interpretation, and the contributions he gave to the development of this approach at a formal level, as well as championing it on repeated occasions. In brief, I intend to play here the role of one of those lucky persons who became acquainted with him personally, who has exchanged important views with him, who has learned a lot from his deep insight and conceptual lucidity, and, last but not least, whose scientific work has been appreciated by him. Moreover, due to the fact that this book intends to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the derivation of the fundamental inequality which bears his name, I will also devote a small part of the text to recalling his clearcut views about the locality issue, views that I believe have not been grasped correctly by a remarkable part of the scientific community. I will analyze this problem in quite general terms at the end of the paper. Some of Bell's Scientific Achievements Bell received bachelor's degrees in experimental physics and in mathematical physics at Queen'sUniversity of Belfast in the years 1948 and 1949, respectively, and a PhD in physics at the University of Birmingham. We all know very well that already at that time he was absolutely unsatisfied with the conceptual structure of quantum mechanics and with the way in which it was taught. This is significantly expressed by the statement he made during an interview to Jeremy Bernstein: I remember arguing with one of my professors, a Doctor Sloane, about that. I was getting very heated and accusing him, more or less, of dishonesty. He was getting very heated too and said, ‘You're going too far.’