Decoherence seems not solve measurement problem, so does the collapsing wavefunction. What do you think?
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/5325/1/QTwrong.pdf
Dear Victor,
you are right , the measurment problem (MP) is not solved by decoherence. The role of decoherence is the following: the MP has two parts: (i) the problem of the prefered basis and (ii) the definite outcome problem. Only the first is probably solved by decoherence (the density operator is approx. diagonal in a specific basis, e.g. the prefered one...). However, there is more than one diagonal-element of the density operator non-zero, e.g. it is still unclear from the orthodox point of view, which one corresponds to the definite outcome. A nice paper on this was written by Stephen Adler ( http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0112095). It is called "why decoherence has not solved the MP". And just as some anecdotal evidence for decoherence alone being not enough for a solution of the MP: many experts on decoherence are many-worlder...
and almost forgotten: the notion of the wavefunction collapse seems to me just a different way to frame the MP - and not to solve it...
Dear Oliver: thank you for your answer. Lyre in the cited paper (see the link) concludes that based on the quantum measurement probLem, it seems that quantum theory contradicts common sense realism. Do you think so? Best wishes
I think Holger has a good point here. Perhaps it can be framed even more simple: the measurement problem taken seriously (i.e. being a scientific realist) points to weird superpositions and the like in the macro-world. However, if you conclude that common sense realism should be given up, the "scientific realism" looses its basis... It seems however, that there are people willing to give up CSR and still belive in SciR. E.g. Albert ("Probability in the Everett Picture" in: Many Worlds? Ed. by Saunders, Barrett, Kent and Wallace) takes this route (ibd. p.355f).
Dear Oliver,
Thank you for your interesting remarks. Yes i have problems with how macroworld interacts with microworld, and also probabilistic interpretation of wavefunction. Besides, electron seems to be able to choose whether it will behave like particle or wave according to Copenhagen interpretation. Manyworld interpretation is just application of this false conjecture to macroworld.
In my humble opinion, one way to solve this quantum riddle is to accept the De Broglie's wave picture. As we know, de Broglie gave his Nobel lecture with title: the wave nature of electron. If my interpretation is correct, he disagreed with the wave-particle dualism picture which is against experimental reality. So what do you think?
One of the problem with the wave mechanics is that the Schrodinger equation corresponds to Helmholtz equation with a varying k. But a varying k is not possible in nature. That is why Schrodinger equation creates so many havoc, such as it only explain hydrogen energy levels. For other complex atoms, one should introduce approximate methods such as DFT (density functional theory).
ps: i have written a short review paper on Schrodinger equation, if you wish i can send it to you or you can find in my list of publications at researchgate. Your comments are welcome
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychometrics
- Measurement