Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] qm texts other than Copenhagen



If you are interested in how it is that the Copenhagen interpretation is dominant, you might want to read Quantum Dialogue by Mara Beller, published by Chicago.

joe

Joseph J. Bellina, Jr. Ph.D.
Professor of Physics
Saint Mary's College
Notre Dame, IN 46556

On Mar 25, 2010, at 9:23 AM, William Maddox wrote:

From: WC Maddox

Those interested in the issue of determinism in QM may want to read this
article:

Would Bohr be born if Bohm were born before Born?

American Journal of Physics -- February 2008 -- Volume 76, Issue 2, pp.
143-146

Discusses a hypothetical historical context in which a Bohm-like
deterministic^ interpretation of the Schrödinger equation is proposed
before the Born^ probabilistic interpretation and argue that in such a
context the^ Copenhagen (Bohr) interpretation would probably have not
achieved great popularity^ among physicists.


End Message



On 3/24/2010 10:34 PM, John Denker wrote:

The current thinking among experts on the subject is that
Thoreau got it right: that which interprets least interprets
best. The equations of motion get the right answer, and do
not really require interpretation.

2) If the real objective is to "preserve determinism" then
the whole game is not worth playing. The field has progressed
since the 1950s. There is absolutely no chance that a hidden
variable theory of the sort Bohm was talking about could be
correct. John Bell and Alain Aspect have had something to
say about it.

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l




_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l