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

arXiv:quant-ph/9512028

Does the Wave Function Provide a Complete Description of Physical Reality?

Sheldon Goldstein, Joel L. Lebowitz

Published Dec 29, 1995• 1 citation
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

This is the introduction to the section on Quantum Mechanics in the centennial collection of noteworthy articles appearing in The Physical Review and Physical Review Letters through 1983, since it all began in 1893. The selections for this section are "Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?" by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen; Bohr's response, with the same title; Bohm's first hidden variables paper: "A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of `Hidden' Variables. I"; Aharonov and Bohm's "Significance of Electromagnetic Potentials in the Quantum Theory"; and "Experimental Test of Bell's Inequalities Using Time-Varying Analyzers" by Aspect, Dalibard and Roger.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/9512028

Related papers

Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?

N. Rosen

ZusammenfassungIn 1935 there appeared a paper with the above title (Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen 1935) in The Physical Review. This paper was the outgrowth of a number of discussions held by Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky and myself at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. The purpose of the discussions was to help us understand the concepts and principles of quantum mechanics, and what we thought we understood troubled us. For the conclusion we reached in these discussions was that the answer to the above question is, “No”.

Vieweg+Teubner eBooks•Jan 1, 1979•30 citations

The Complete Theory of Quantum Mechanics

Kazmer Ujvarosy

Based on a thought experiment the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paper’s authors concluded that in quantum mechanics the mathematical objects called wave functions fail to describe the physical reality and consequently quantum theory is incomplete. They left open the question of whether or not a complete description of the physical reality exists, but expressed their belief that such a complete theory is possible. In this paper I show that indeed a theory that gives a complete description of the physical reality exists.

•Dec 1, 2020•0 citations

Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete?

Niels Henrik David Bohr

It is shown that a certain "criterion of physical reality" formulated in a recent article with the above title by A. Einstein, B. Podolsky and N. Rosen contains an essential ambiguity when it is applied to quantum phenomena. In this connection a viewpoint termed "complementarity" is explained from which quantum-mechanical description of physical phenomena would seem to fulfill, within its scope, all rational demands of completeness.

Physical Review•Oct 15, 1935•1,941 citations

Physical and philosophical issues in the Bohr–Einstein debate

Abner Shimony

ASPECTS OF THE DEBATE The debate between Niels Bohr and Albert Einstein concerning the interpretation of quantum mechanics extended from the fifth Solvay Conference in 1927 until the end of Einstein's life. The most dramatic exchange occurred in 1935, when Einstein, in collaboration with B. Podolsky and N. Rosen, published a paper in Physical Review entitled “Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?”, concluding with a negative answer, and Bohr replied in the same journal, with a paper of the same title but giving a positive answer. Their arguments were restated, in some respects with greater clarity, in the Library of Living Philosophers volume on Einstein in 1949. The disagreements between Bohr and Einstein concerned not only the physical question expressed in the common title of their papers, but also philosophical questions about physical reality and human knowledge. Much light was thrown upon the Bohr–Einstein debate by the theorem of J. S. Bell (1964) and the experiments which it inspired. Bell showed that any physical theory which applies to a pair of spatially separated systems (as considered in the thought experiment of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen) and satisfies a certain locality condition will, in certain circumstances, disagree statistically with quantum mechanics. Consequently, the supplementation of the quantum mechanical description envisaged by Einstein and his collaborators (usually referred to as a “hidden variables theory”) must either violate the locality condition or clash with quantum mechanical predictions.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Feb 26, 1993•5 citations

Relativity, entanglement and the physical reality of the photon

Suresh Chandra Tiwari

Recent experiments on the classic Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) setting claim to test the compatibility between nonlocal quantum entanglement and the (special) theory of relativity. Confirmation of quantum theory has led to the interpretation that Einstein's image of physical reality for each photon in the EPR pair cannot be maintained. A detailed critique on two representative experiments is presented following the original EPR notion of local realism. It is argued that relativity does not enter into the picture, however for the Bell-Bohm version of local realism in terms of hidden variables such experiments are significant. Of the two alternatives, namely incompleteness of quantum theory for describing an individual quantum system, and the ensemble view, it is only the former that has been ruled out by the experiments. An alternative approach gives a statistical ensemble interpretation of the observed data, and the significant conclusion that these experiments do not deny physical reality of the photon is obtained. After discussing the need for a photon model, a vortex structure is proposed based on the space-time invariant property-spin, and pure gauge fields. To test the prime role of spin for photons and the angular-momentum interpretation of electromagnetic fields, experimental schemes feasible in modern laboratories are suggested.

Journal of Optics B Quantum and Semiclassical Optics•Feb 15, 2002•8 citations

Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete?

Guido Bacciagaluppi, Elise Crull

This is a reprinting of Bohr’s response to the EPR paper, wherein Bohr relies on his principle of complementarity to demonstrate an ambiguity in the criterion of reality as described by EPR and to argue that quantum mechanics is in fact a complete description of reality given the bounds of complementarity.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Nov 14, 2024•58 citations
This is the introduction to the section on Quantum Mechanics in the centennial collection of noteworthy articles appearing in The Physical Review and Physical Review Letters through 1983, since it all began in 1893. The selections for this section are "Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?" by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen; Bohr's response, with the same title; Bohm's first hidden variables paper: "A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of `Hidden' Variables. I"; Aharonov and Bohm's "Significance of Electromagnetic Potentials in the Quantum Theory"; and "Experimental Test of Bell's Inequalities Using Time-Varying Analyzers" by Aspect, Dalibard and Roger.
ZusammenfassungIn 1935 there appeared a paper with the above title (Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen 1935) in The Physical Review. This paper was the outgrowth of a number of discussions held by Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky and myself at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. The purpose of the discussions was to help us understand the concepts and principles of quantum mechanics, and what we thought we understood troubled us. For the conclusion we reached in these discussions was that the answer to the above question is, “No”.
Based on a thought experiment the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paper’s authors concluded that in quantum mechanics the mathematical objects called wave functions fail to describe the physical reality and consequently quantum theory is incomplete. They left open the question of whether or not a complete description of the physical reality exists, but expressed their belief that such a complete theory is possible. In this paper I show that indeed a theory that gives a complete description of the physical reality exists.
ASPECTS OF THE DEBATE The debate between Niels Bohr and Albert Einstein concerning the interpretation of quantum mechanics extended from the fifth Solvay Conference in 1927 until the end of Einstein's life. The most dramatic exchange occurred in 1935, when Einstein, in collaboration with B. Podolsky and N. Rosen, published a paper in Physical Review entitled “Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?”, concluding with a negative answer, and Bohr replied in the same journal, with a paper of the same title but giving a positive answer. Their arguments were restated, in some respects with greater clarity, in the Library of Living Philosophers volume on Einstein in 1949. The disagreements between Bohr and Einstein concerned not only the physical question expressed in the common title of their papers, but also philosophical questions about physical reality and human knowledge. Much light was thrown upon the Bohr–Einstein debate by the theorem of J. S. Bell (1964) and the experiments which it inspired. Bell showed that any physical theory which applies to a pair of spatially separated systems (as considered in the thought experiment of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen) and satisfies a certain locality condition will, in certain circumstances, disagree statistically with quantum mechanics. Consequently, the supplementation of the quantum mechanical description envisaged by Einstein and his collaborators (usually referred to as a “hidden variables theory”) must either violate the locality condition or clash with quantum mechanical predictions.
Recent experiments on the classic Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) setting claim to test the compatibility between nonlocal quantum entanglement and the (special) theory of relativity. Confirmation of quantum theory has led to the interpretation that Einstein's image of physical reality for each photon in the EPR pair cannot be maintained. A detailed critique on two representative experiments is presented following the original EPR notion of local realism. It is argued that relativity does not enter into the picture, however for the Bell-Bohm version of local realism in terms of hidden variables such experiments are significant. Of the two alternatives, namely incompleteness of quantum theory for describing an individual quantum system, and the ensemble view, it is only the former that has been ruled out by the experiments. An alternative approach gives a statistical ensemble interpretation of the observed data, and the significant conclusion that these experiments do not deny physical reality of the photon is obtained. After discussing the need for a photon model, a vortex structure is proposed based on the space-time invariant property-spin, and pure gauge fields. To test the prime role of spin for photons and the angular-momentum interpretation of electromagnetic fields, experimental schemes feasible in modern laboratories are suggested.