{"title":"PBR、非现实性和纠缠测量","authors":"Gábor Hofer-Szabó","doi":"10.1007/s10701-024-00772-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In a recent paper, Cabbolet argues that the PBR theorem is nonreal since in the ensemble interpretation of quantum mechanics the entangled measurement used in the derivation of the PBR theorem is nonexisting. However, Cabbolet (1) does not provide any argument for the nonexistence of entangled measurements beyond the incompatibility of the existence of entangled measurements and the existence of <span>\\(\\psi\\)</span>-epistemic models which we already know from the PBR theorem; and (2) he does not show why it is more reasonable to abandon entangled measurements instead of <span>\\(\\psi\\)</span>-epistemic models. Hence, the PBR theorem remains intact.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":569,"journal":{"name":"Foundations of Physics","volume":"54 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"PBR, Nonreality and Entangled Measurement\",\"authors\":\"Gábor Hofer-Szabó\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10701-024-00772-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>In a recent paper, Cabbolet argues that the PBR theorem is nonreal since in the ensemble interpretation of quantum mechanics the entangled measurement used in the derivation of the PBR theorem is nonexisting. However, Cabbolet (1) does not provide any argument for the nonexistence of entangled measurements beyond the incompatibility of the existence of entangled measurements and the existence of <span>\\\\(\\\\psi\\\\)</span>-epistemic models which we already know from the PBR theorem; and (2) he does not show why it is more reasonable to abandon entangled measurements instead of <span>\\\\(\\\\psi\\\\)</span>-epistemic models. Hence, the PBR theorem remains intact.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":569,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Foundations of Physics\",\"volume\":\"54 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Foundations of Physics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"101\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10701-024-00772-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"物理与天体物理\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHYSICS, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foundations of Physics","FirstCategoryId":"101","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10701-024-00772-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHYSICS, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
In a recent paper, Cabbolet argues that the PBR theorem is nonreal since in the ensemble interpretation of quantum mechanics the entangled measurement used in the derivation of the PBR theorem is nonexisting. However, Cabbolet (1) does not provide any argument for the nonexistence of entangled measurements beyond the incompatibility of the existence of entangled measurements and the existence of \(\psi\)-epistemic models which we already know from the PBR theorem; and (2) he does not show why it is more reasonable to abandon entangled measurements instead of \(\psi\)-epistemic models. Hence, the PBR theorem remains intact.
期刊介绍：
The conceptual foundations of physics have been under constant revision from the outset, and remain so today. Discussion of foundational issues has always been a major source of progress in science, on a par with empirical knowledge and mathematics. Examples include the debates on the nature of space and time involving Newton and later Einstein; on the nature of heat and of energy; on irreversibility and probability due to Boltzmann; on the nature of matter and observation measurement during the early days of quantum theory; on the meaning of renormalisation, and many others.
Today, insightful reflection on the conceptual structure utilised in our efforts to understand the physical world is of particular value, given the serious unsolved problems that are likely to demand, once again, modifications of the grammar of our scientific description of the physical world. The quantum properties of gravity, the nature of measurement in quantum mechanics, the primary source of irreversibility, the role of information in physics – all these are examples of questions about which science is still confused and whose solution may well demand more than skilled mathematics and new experiments.
Foundations of Physics is a privileged forum for discussing such foundational issues, open to physicists, cosmologists, philosophers and mathematicians. It is devoted to the conceptual bases of the fundamental theories of physics and cosmology, to their logical, methodological, and philosophical premises.
The journal welcomes papers on issues such as the foundations of special and general relativity, quantum theory, classical and quantum field theory, quantum gravity, unified theories, thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, cosmology, and similar.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
