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

An irreversible act

Jim Baggott

Published Nov 6, 2003• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Abstract If we are not persuaded of the approach to recovering causality in quantum physics through the de Broglie-Bohm theory (perhaps because, like Einstein, we think this route ‘too cheap’) or Popper’s reinterpretation of the meaning of probability, we must seek alternative solutions to the problems of quantum probability and the collapse of the wave function. Even if we choose to accept what quantum probability tells us concerning the fundamental indeterminism and acausality of the quantum world, we are still left to trouble over quantum measurement.

DOI
10.1093/oso/9780198529279.003.0012

Related papers

There is no quantum measurement problem

N. David Mermin

The idea that the collapse of a quantum state is a physical process stems from a misunderstanding of probability and the role it plays in quantum mechanics.

Physics Today•Jun 1, 2022•32 citations

Quantum theory and the measurement problem

Guido Bacciagaluppi, Antony Valentini

What is quantum theory? For much of the twentieth century, it was widely believed that the interpretation of quantum theory had been essentially settled by Bohr and Heisenberg in 1927. But not only were the ‘dissenters’ of 1927 – in particular de Broglie, Einstein and Schrödinger – unconvinced at the time: similar dissenting points of view are not uncommon even today. What Popper called ‘the schism in physics’ (Popper 1982) never really healed. Soon after 1927 it became standard to assert that matters of interpretation had been dealt with, but the sense of puzzlement and paradox surrounding quantum theory never disappeared. As the century wore on, many of the concerns and alternative viewpoints expressed in 1927 slowly but surely revived. In 1952, Bohm revived and extended de Broglie's theory (Bohm 1952a,b), and in 1993 the de Broglie–Bohm theory finally received textbook treatment as an alternative formulation of quantum theory (Bohm and Hiley 1993; Holland 1993). In 1957, Everett (1957) revived Schrödinger's view that the wave function, and the wave function alone, is real (albeit in a very novel sense), and the resulting ‘Everett’ or ‘many-worlds’ interpretation (DeWitt and Graham 1973) gradually won widespread support, especially among physicists interested in quantum gravity and quantum cosmology.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Oct 22, 2009•0 citations

A note on the quantum measurement problem

N. David Mermin

The idea that wave-function collapse is a physical process stems from a misunderstanding of probability and the role it plays in quantum mechanics.

arXiv:2206.10741•Jun 21, 2022•0 citations

Protective measurements and the meaning of the wave function in the de Broglie-Bohm theory

Shan Gao

There are three possible interpretations of the wave function in the de Broglie-Bohm theory: taking the wave function as corresponding to a physical entity or a property of the Bohmian particles or a law. In this paper, we argue that the first interpretation is favored by an analysis of protective measurements. The de Broglie-Bohm theory is an alternative to standard quantum mechan-ics initially proposed by de Broglie (1928) and later developed by Bohm (1952). According to the theory, a complete description of a quantum system is provided by the configuration defined by the positions of its particles together with its wave function. The wave function follows the linear Schrödinger equation and never collapses. The motion of the particles, which are usually called Bohmian particles, follows the so-called guiding equation. Although the de Broglie-Bohm theory is mathematically equivalent to quantum mechanics, there is no clear consensus with regard to its physical interpretation. In particular, the interpre-

•May 24, 2013•0 citations

Origin of "De Broglie" Waves (Calculations in Mathematica 11.0) Publisher Wolfram

Wim Vegt

Printed Calculations in Mathematica 11.0 of the Article: "Origing of de Broglie Waves" The famous 1927 Solvay Conference was considered a turning point in the world of Physics. The scientific realists like Albert Einstein had lost and the instrumentalists like Niels Bohr had won the fundamental conflict. Since then Physics has followed the path of the instrumentalists in which Quantum Physics has been determined by the concept of Elementary Particles and Probability Waves. Until May 2013, when for the first time a photo had been made of the Probability Waves Inside the Hydrogen Atom . It should be impossible to make a photo of a non-existing complex probability wave with mass zero But the fact could not be denied anymore that scientists had succeeded to make the “complex” and the “non-existing” quantum mechanical “Probability Wave” visible. Since the Copenhagen Interpretation there is still no clarity about the physical interpretation of the Quantum Mechanical “Probability Wave Function”This Manuscript describes a third unknown interpretation of the Quantum Mechanical “Probability Wave Function”. A fundamental physical interpretation that will change the generally accepted Copenhagen Interpretation. This Manuscript will answer the fundamental question: Does an alternative theory exist in which the existence of this particular photo, of the Quantum Mechanical Probability Wave within the Hydrogen Atom, could be explained. And that the famous photo of the Hydrogen Atom can be explained in a logical and a simple way. To find the answer, we have to go back in time. Back 300 years in time to the moment when Isaac Newton discovered the beauty and one of the many secrets of the light. The moment when science walked away from light. And we return to the fundamental question: “Is it possible to build Matter out of Light (confined electromagnetic waves)?” To answer this question if it is possible to build Matter out of Light, we first have to answer the question how we have come to this world of Probability Waves and Elementary Particles and Quantum Physics.Louis de Broglie described in 1924 in his PhD thesis the wave properties of matter. Erwin Schrödinger published in 1926 the well-known Schrödinger wave equation with the characteristic spherical and elliptical wave solutions. To describe these material waves, the immediately and first explanation was: “There is only one possibility. These are “Electromagnetic Waves”. De Broglie Waves are ” Light Waves”. Because these were the only waves, known in the world of Physics, that could travel through vacuum. But there was a fundamental problem. These material waves, discovered by Louis de Broglie and mathematically described by Erwin Schrödinger could never be solutions of the well-known 4 linear equations of James Clerk Maxwell. The material waves were spherical and elliptical solutions of confinement and that was impossible for the solutions of the linear Maxwell Equations. According to the linear Maxwell Equations, superposition is possible but Electromagnetic Interaction and Electromagnetic Confinement can only be described by a set of non-linear differential equations. To solve this fundamental problem a new set of 3 non-linear Electromagnetic Equations (Equation 5 in this manuscript) has been developed which replaces the well-known 4 linear Maxwell Equations and the possible solutions of Equation (5) are also Spherical and Elliptical solutions of confinement. Table 1 in this manuscript presents a number of Electromagnetic Spherical Confinements as solutions of Equation 5a .A second problem was that the model of the atom of Bohr could not hold. How could an electron be everywhere at the same time in a kind of a spherical shell surrounding the nucleus. And be a particle at the same time. And Bohr found a compromise to declare the “De Broglie” waves to be the probability waves. Two problems were solved. Bohr’s planetary model could hold. And there was a name for the unknown material waves, discovered by Louis de Broglie and mathematically described by Erwin Schrödinger. The theory of “Probability Waves, Elementary Particles and Quantum Physics” had been created. A new equation has to be found. In this article it has been claimed that this missing equation is Equation (5). Wim VegtDepartment of PhysicsEindhoven University of Technology The NetherlandsCorrespondence: HST@quantumlight.scienceData: https://quantumlight.science/

•May 9, 2018•11 citations

Quantum (Statistical) Mechanics, Measurement and Information

Roger Balian

Ever since the beginning of quantum mechanics, the measurement problem has been a subject of sometimes discontinued but nevertheless recurrent concern. As students, most physicists have raised questions about it, but the spectacular and renewed successes of quantum theory were a strong incentive for them to work out applications without further worrying about foundations. In each generation, however, some dissatisfaction reemerges, which leads to slow progress, and we may expect that the measurement problem will some day be cleared up rather than forgotten. The situation recalls statistical mechanics, the foundations of which still give rise to scientific discussions, in spite of more than one century’s achievements. Actually, the paradoxes of irreversibility and of Maxwell’s demon share some common features with quantum measurements, to wit, they involve probabilities in a crucial fashion and their explanation requires elucidating the role of the observer.

CRC Press eBooks•Oct 19, 2017•0 citations
Abstract If we are not persuaded of the approach to recovering causality in quantum physics through the de Broglie-Bohm theory (perhaps because, like Einstein, we think this route ‘too cheap’) or Popper’s reinterpretation of the meaning of probability, we must seek alternative solutions to the problems of quantum probability and the collapse of the wave function. Even if we choose to accept what quantum probability tells us concerning the fundamental indeterminism and acausality of the quantum world, we are still left to trouble over quantum measurement.
What is quantum theory? For much of the twentieth century, it was widely believed that the interpretation of quantum theory had been essentially settled by Bohr and Heisenberg in 1927. But not only were the ‘dissenters’ of 1927 – in particular de Broglie, Einstein and Schrödinger – unconvinced at the time: similar dissenting points of view are not uncommon even today. What Popper called ‘the schism in physics’ (Popper 1982) never really healed. Soon after 1927 it became standard to assert that matters of interpretation had been dealt with, but the sense of puzzlement and paradox surrounding quantum theory never disappeared. As the century wore on, many of the concerns and alternative viewpoints expressed in 1927 slowly but surely revived. In 1952, Bohm revived and extended de Broglie's theory (Bohm 1952a,b), and in 1993 the de Broglie–Bohm theory finally received textbook treatment as an alternative formulation of quantum theory (Bohm and Hiley 1993; Holland 1993). In 1957, Everett (1957) revived Schrödinger's view that the wave function, and the wave function alone, is real (albeit in a very novel sense), and the resulting ‘Everett’ or ‘many-worlds’ interpretation (DeWitt and Graham 1973) gradually won widespread support, especially among physicists interested in quantum gravity and quantum cosmology.
There are three possible interpretations of the wave function in the de Broglie-Bohm theory: taking the wave function as corresponding to a physical entity or a property of the Bohmian particles or a law. In this paper, we argue that the first interpretation is favored by an analysis of protective measurements. The de Broglie-Bohm theory is an alternative to standard quantum mechan-ics initially proposed by de Broglie (1928) and later developed by Bohm (1952). According to the theory, a complete description of a quantum system is provided by the configuration defined by the positions of its particles together with its wave function. The wave function follows the linear Schrödinger equation and never collapses. The motion of the particles, which are usually called Bohmian particles, follows the so-called guiding equation. Although the de Broglie-Bohm theory is mathematically equivalent to quantum mechanics, there is no clear consensus with regard to its physical interpretation. In particular, the interpre-
Printed Calculations in Mathematica 11.0 of the Article: "Origing of de Broglie Waves" The famous 1927 Solvay Conference was considered a turning point in the world of Physics. The scientific realists like Albert Einstein had lost and the instrumentalists like Niels Bohr had won the fundamental conflict. Since then Physics has followed the path of the instrumentalists in which Quantum Physics has been determined by the concept of Elementary Particles and Probability Waves. Until May 2013, when for the first time a photo had been made of the Probability Waves Inside the Hydrogen Atom . It should be impossible to make a photo of a non-existing complex probability wave with mass zero But the fact could not be denied anymore that scientists had succeeded to make the “complex” and the “non-existing” quantum mechanical “Probability Wave” visible. Since the Copenhagen Interpretation there is still no clarity about the physical interpretation of the Quantum Mechanical “Probability Wave Function”This Manuscript describes a third unknown interpretation of the Quantum Mechanical “Probability Wave Function”. A fundamental physical interpretation that will change the generally accepted Copenhagen Interpretation. This Manuscript will answer the fundamental question: Does an alternative theory exist in which the existence of this particular photo, of the Quantum Mechanical Probability Wave within the Hydrogen Atom, could be explained. And that the famous photo of the Hydrogen Atom can be explained in a logical and a simple way. To find the answer, we have to go back in time. Back 300 years in time to the moment when Isaac Newton discovered the beauty and one of the many secrets of the light. The moment when science walked away from light. And we return to the fundamental question: “Is it possible to build Matter out of Light (confined electromagnetic waves)?” To answer this question if it is possible to build Matter out of Light, we first have to answer the question how we have come to this world of Probability Waves and Elementary Particles and Quantum Physics.Louis de Broglie described in 1924 in his PhD thesis the wave properties of matter. Erwin Schrödinger published in 1926 the well-known Schrödinger wave equation with the characteristic spherical and elliptical wave solutions. To describe these material waves, the immediately and first explanation was: “There is only one possibility. These are “Electromagnetic Waves”. De Broglie Waves are ” Light Waves”. Because these were the only waves, known in the world of Physics, that could travel through vacuum. But there was a fundamental problem. These material waves, discovered by Louis de Broglie and mathematically described by Erwin Schrödinger could never be solutions of the well-known 4 linear equations of James Clerk Maxwell. The material waves were spherical and elliptical solutions of confinement and that was impossible for the solutions of the linear Maxwell Equations. According to the linear Maxwell Equations, superposition is possible but Electromagnetic Interaction and Electromagnetic Confinement can only be described by a set of non-linear differential equations. To solve this fundamental problem a new set of 3 non-linear Electromagnetic Equations (Equation 5 in this manuscript) has been developed which replaces the well-known 4 linear Maxwell Equations and the possible solutions of Equation (5) are also Spherical and Elliptical solutions of confinement. Table 1 in this manuscript presents a number of Electromagnetic Spherical Confinements as solutions of Equation 5a .A second problem was that the model of the atom of Bohr could not hold. How could an electron be everywhere at the same time in a kind of a spherical shell surrounding the nucleus. And be a particle at the same time. And Bohr found a compromise to declare the “De Broglie” waves to be the probability waves. Two problems were solved. Bohr’s planetary model could hold. And there was a name for the unknown material waves, discovered by Louis de Broglie and mathematically described by Erwin Schrödinger. The theory of “Probability Waves, Elementary Particles and Quantum Physics” had been created. A new equation has to be found. In this article it has been claimed that this missing equation is Equation (5). Wim VegtDepartment of PhysicsEindhoven University of Technology The NetherlandsCorrespondence: HST@quantumlight.scienceData: https://quantumlight.science/
Ever since the beginning of quantum mechanics, the measurement problem has been a subject of sometimes discontinued but nevertheless recurrent concern. As students, most physicists have raised questions about it, but the spectacular and renewed successes of quantum theory were a strong incentive for them to work out applications without further worrying about foundations. In each generation, however, some dissatisfaction reemerges, which leads to slow progress, and we may expect that the measurement problem will some day be cleared up rather than forgotten. The situation recalls statistical mechanics, the foundations of which still give rise to scientific discussions, in spite of more than one century’s achievements. Actually, the paradoxes of irreversibility and of Maxwell’s demon share some common features with quantum measurements, to wit, they involve probabilities in a crucial fashion and their explanation requires elucidating the role of the observer.