Measurement and Macroscopicity: Overcoming Conceptual Imprecision in Quantum Measurement Theory (original) (raw)

"QUANTUM MEASUREMENT: A New View" [UET7A]

Measurement in science is central and flawed. The major difference between Classical Mechanics (CM) and Quantum Mechanics (QM) lie in the assumptions of measurement. In CM, all measurements were assumed to be 'harmless' and repeatable being an immediate interpretation of the algebraic variables. In QM, it has been recognized that ALL observations affect the target system but repetition of the exactly identical initial conditions are possible. There is an explicit formula used for linking the Wave-Function of 'observable' variables to arithmetic numbers uncovered in exactly repeatable experiments leading to a frequency-probabilistic interpretation of the arithmetic numbers. These assumptions are critically analyzed based on a misunderstanding of the role of measurement. The report is major part of a research programme (UET) based on a new theory of the electromagnetism (EM), centered exclusively on the interaction between electrons. All the previous papers to date in this series have presented a realistic view of the dynamics of two or more electrons as they interact only between themselves. This paper now posits a theory of how this microscopic activity is perceived by human beings in attempting to extract information about atomic systems. The standard theory of quantum mechanics is constructed on only how the micro-world appears to macro measurements-as such, it cannot offer any view of how the foundations of the world are acting when humans are NOT observing it (the vast majority of the time)-This has generated almost 100 years of confusion and contradiction at the very heart of physics. We now know that all human beings (and all our instruments) are vast collections of electrons, our information about atomic-scale can only be obtained destructively and statistically. This theory now extends the realistic model of digital electrons by adding an explicit measurement model of how our macro instruments interfere with nature's micro-systems when such attempts result in human-scale information. The focus here is on the connection between the micro-world (when left to itself) and our mental models of this sphere of material reality, via the mechanism of atomic measurements. The mathematics of quantum mechanics reflects the eigenvalues of the combined target system PLUS equipment used for measurement together. Therefore, QM has constructed a theory that inseparably conflates the ontological and epistemological views of nature. This standard approach fails to examine isolated target systems alone. It is metaphysically deficient. This critical investigation concludes that the Quantum State function (Ψ) is not a representation of physical reality, within a single atom, but a generator function for producing the average statistical results on many atoms of this type. In contrast, the present theory builds on the physical reality of micro-states of single atoms, where (in the case of hydrogen), a single electron executes a series of fixed segments (corresponding to the micro-states) across the atom between a finite number of discrete interactions between the electron and one of the positrons in the nucleus. The set of temporal segments form closed trajectories with real temporal periods, contra to Heisenberg's 'papal' decree banning such reality because of his need to measure position and momentum at all times; even though instantaneous momentum is never measured.

Quantum Measurements, Propensities and the Problem of Measurement

2004

This paper expands on, and provides a qualified defence of, Arthur Fine's selective interactions solution to the measurement problem. Fine's approach must be understood against the background of the insolubility proof of the quantum measurement. I first defend the proof as an ...

Chapter 5 The Measurement Problem in Quantum Mechanics Revisited

Selected Topics in Applications of Quantum Mechanics, 2017

The theory formulated by J. von Neumann in the late 1920 consists of five axioms. Two of them deal with measurements. One of them refers to the possible results of a measurement, and their corresponding probabilities. The other one refers to the system’s state once the measurement process is completed. These issues were present since the quantum mechanical formalism was established. In the following years other problems were unveiled and the Projection Postulate became the principal target of criticisms. In particular, it was pointed out that this postulate introduces a subjective element into the theory; it conflicts with the Schrödïnger equation; and it implies a kind of action-at-a-distance. This chapter critically reviews quantum measurement, starting with contributions by E. Schrödinger and M. Born dating from 1926. Several ways to face the measurement problem are reported and discussed, among them: Dirac’s notion of observation; Bohr’s point of view; von Neumann’s theory of measurement; Margenau’s rejection of the Projection Postulate; the Many Worlds Interpretation; and Decoherence. Brief references are made to Schrödinger cat, EPR paradox, Bell’s inequalities and quantum teleportation. A comparison between the characteristics of spontaneous processes and those of measurement processes highlights why so many scientists are disappointed with Orthodox Quantum Mechanics formalism, and in particular with its Projection Postulate. In the last sections of the chapter we deal with the following items: (i) Conservation laws are strictly valid in spontaneous processes and have only a statistical sense in measurement processes; (ii) Ad-hoc use of the Projection Postulate; (iii) Introduction of the essential concepts involved in the Spontaneous Projection Approach; and (iv) Formal treatment of the ideal measurement scheme in the framework of this approach.

The Unreasonable Success of Quantum Probability II: Quantum Measurements as Universal Measurements

2014

In the first part of this two-part article, we have introduced and analyzed a multidimensional model, called the 'general tension-reduction' (GTR) model, able to describe general quantum-like measurements with an arbitrary number of outcomes, and we have used it as a general theoretical framework to study the most general possible condition of lack of knowledge in a measurement, so defining what we have called a 'universal measurement'. In this second part, we present the formal proof that universal measurements, which are averages over all possible forms of fluctuations, produce the same probabilities as measurements characterized by 'uniform' fluctuations on the measurement situation. Since quantum probabilities can be shown to arise from the presence of such uniform fluctuations, we have proven that they can be interpreted as the probabilities of a first-order non-classical theory, describing situations in which the experimenter lacks complete knowledge ab...

What Is the Measurement Problem Anyway? Introductory Reflections on Quantum Puzzles

Springer eBooks, 2005

Can the quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?" It is perhaps not coincidental that this question, the title of Einstein's famous onslaught on quantum mechanics [1], was echoed verbatim in the title of Bohr's reply [2]. Although Bohr opted for a "Yes", today even his ardent followers (see Wheeler below) believe that quantum mechanics is not the last word. Someday, we all believe, a new theory will revolutionize physics, just as relativity and quantum mechanics did at the dawn of the 20th century. It will include its two parent revolutions as special cases, just as classical mechanics has been comfortably embedded within relativity theory and less comfortably within quantum mechanics. What this theory will tell us about the nature of reality is anybody's guess, but John Wheeler has vividly captured its most immediate feature [3]: Surely someday, we can believe, we will grasp the central idea of it all as so simple, so beautiful, so compelling that we will say to each other, "Oh, how could it have been otherwise! How could we have been so blind so long!" (p. 28) Greenberger, however, has much more sobering reflections [4]:

Critical investigation of Jauch's approach to the quantum theory of measurement

International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 1986

To make Jauch's approach more realistic, his assumptions are modified in two ways: (1) On the quantum system plus the measuring apparatus (S+ MA) after the measuring interaction has ceased, one can actually measure only operators of the form A | ~k bk Qk, where A is any Hermitian operator for S, the resolution of the identity ~.k Ok = 1 defines MA as a classical system (following von Neumann), and the b k are real numbers (S and MA are distant).