Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:18:35.572Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quantum Theory and Cosmolog

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

C. J. S. Clarke
C. J. S. Clarke*
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Interpretations, or generalizations, of quantum theory that are applicable to cosmology are of interest because they must display and resolve the “paradoxes” directly. The Everett interpretation is reexamined and compared with two alternatives. Its “metaphysical” connotations can be removed, after which it is found to be more acceptable than a theory which incorporates collapse, while retaining some unsatisfactory features.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 41 , Issue 4 , December 1974 , pp. 317 - 332
Copyright
Copyright © 1974 by The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

I should like to thank the many friends and critics who have helped bring this paper to its present form, and particularly the referee for this journal to whose careful comments I owe much of any clarity I may have achieved.

References

REFERENCES

[1] Clarke, C. J. S. “Smoothing the Quantum Collapse.” International Journal of Theoretica. Physics 8 (1973): 231–235.10.1007/BF00678487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2] Daneri, A., Loinger, A., and Prosperi, G. M. “Quantum Theory of Measurement and Ergodicity Conditions.” Nuclear Physics 33 (1962): 297–319.10.1016/0029-5582(62)90528-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3] De Witt, B. S. and Graham, N. (eds.). The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1973.Google Scholar
[4] Everett, H. III “‘Relative State’ Formulation of Quantum Mechanics.” Reviews of Modern Physics 29 (1957): 454–462.10.1103/RevModPhys.29.454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5] Hartle, J. B. “Quantum Mechanics of Individual Systems.” American Journal of Physics 36 (1968): 704–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6] Kingman, J. F. C. and Taylor, S. J. Introduction to Measure and Probability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7] Penrose, R. “Angular Momentum: An Approach to Combinatorial Space-Time.” in Quantum Theory and Beyond. Edited by Bastin, E. T. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970.Google Scholar
[8] Penrose, R. “On the Nature of Quantum Geometry.” in Magic Without Magic. Edited by Klauder, J. R. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1972.Google Scholar
[9] Popper, K. R. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Harper and Row, 1959.Google Scholar
[10] De Witt, B. S. “The Everett-Wheeler Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.” in Battelle Rencontres. Edited by De Witt, C. M. and Wheeler, J. A. New York: W. A. Benjamin, 1968.Google Scholar