Abstract
The first part of this article analyzes the ‘paradoxical’ implications of elementary quantum theory described by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (1935; henceforth, EPR). At the end of the analysis we are left with a dilemma for the interpretation of quantum mechanics.
The research for this article was supported by Canada Council Grants S72-0810 and S73-0849. I wish to acknowledge gratefully my debt to Professor H. Margenau, Yale University; and also to Professor N. Cartwright, Stanford University, Dr. J. Dorling, Chelsea College of Science and Technology, and Professor C. A. Hooker, University of Western Ontario.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Cartwright, N., `A Dilemma for the Traditional Interpretation of Quantum Mixtures’, in K. F. Schaffner and R. S. Cohen (eds.), PSA 1972, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. XX, Reidel, Dordrecht, p. 251.
Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., and Rosen, N., `Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Reality Be Considered Complete?’, Physical Review 47 (1935), 777–780.
Grossman, N, N., `The Ignorance Interpretation Defended’, 1974, forthcoming.
Hooker, C. A., `Concerning Einstein’s, Podolski’s, and Rosen’s Objection to Quantum Theory’, American Journal of Physics 38 (1970), 851–857.
Hooker, C. A., `The Nature of Quantum Mechanical Reality: Einstein versus Bohr’, in R. Colodny (ed.), Paradigms and Paradoxes: The Philosophical Challenge of the Quantum Domain, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, 1972.
Jauch, J. M., Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1968.
Margenau, H., `Quantum-Mechanical Description’, Physical Review 49 (1936), 240–242.
Margenau, H., `Measurements in Quantum Mechanics’, Annals of Physics 23 (1963), 469–485.
Post, H. R., `The Incompleteness of Quantum Mechanics’, in T. Bastin (ed.), Quantum Theory and Beyond, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1971.
Reisler, D. L., The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Yale University, 1967.
Schrödinger, E., `Discussion of Probability Relations Between Separated Systems’, Proceedings Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 (1935), 555–563.
Schrödinger, E., `Probability Relations Between Separated Systems’, Proceedings Cambridge Philosophical Society 32 (1936), 446–452.
Sneed, J. D., `Von Neumann’s Argument for the Projection Postulate’, Philosophy of Science 33 (1966), 22–39.
van Fraassen, B. C., `A Formal Approach to the Philosophy of Science’, in R. Colodny (ed.), Paradigms and Paradoxes: The Philosophical Challenge of the Quantum Domain, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, 1972.
van Fraassen, B. C., `Semantic Analysis of Quantum Logic’, in C. A. Hooker (ed.), Contemporary Research in the Foundations and Philosophy of Quantum Theory, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1973.
von Neumann, J., Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1955.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1976 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Van Fraassen, B.C. (1976). The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox. In: Suppes, P. (eds) Logic and Probability in Quantum Mechanics. Synthese Library, vol 78. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-9466-5_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-9466-5_14
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-277-1200-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-9466-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive