An Underappreciated Exchange in the Bohr--Einstein Debate
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2003.14385v1
- Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 17:29:32 GMT
- Title: An Underappreciated Exchange in the Bohr--Einstein Debate
- Authors: Blake C. Stacey
- Abstract summary: One of the few clear patterns in a 2013 survey about quantum foundations was that the physicists who believed Bohr to be correct were apt to say that Einstein had been wrong.
Not every episode in this long story has been investigated equally.
One late statement attributed to Bohr has received much more intense examination than Einstein's equally pithy reply.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: The Bohr--Einstein debate is one of the more remarkable protracted
intellectual exchanges in the history of physics. Its influence has been
lasting: One of the few clear patterns in a 2013 survey about quantum
foundations was that the physicists who believed Bohr to be correct were apt to
say that Einstein had been wrong. The exchanges began when Bohr and Einstein
first met in 1920, continued at the Solvay conferences of the following decade,
reached a dramatic crescendo with the EPR paradox in 1935, and continued
thereafter. Not every episode in this long story has been investigated equally.
In particular, one late statement attributed to Bohr has received much more
intense examination than Einstein's equally pithy reply.
Related papers
- Bohr and von Neumann on the Universality of Quantum Mechanics: Materials for the History of the Quantum Measurement Process [0.0]
The Bohr and von Neumann views on the measurement process in quantum mechanics have been interpreted for a long time in somewhat controversial terms.
I would like to show that, contrary to a widespread opinion, their views should be taken less inconsistent, and much closer to each other, than usually thought.
I claim that Bohr and von Neumann are conceptually on the same side on the issue of the universality of quantum mechanics.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-13T13:04:22Z) - A centennial reappraisal of Heisenberg's Quantum Mechanics with a
perspective on Einstein's Quantum Riddle [0.0]
Heisenberg's breakthrough in his July 1925 paper that set in motion the development of Quantum Mechanics is reexamined through a modern lens.
We shall discuss some new perspectives on what could be the guiding intuitions for his discoveries and the origin of the Born-Jordan-Heisenberg canonical quantization rule.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-08-08T11:59:47Z) - Why Bohr was wrong in his response to EPR [0.0]
We explicitly describe Bohr's gedanken experiment involving a double-slit moving diaphragm interacting with two independent particles.
We propose a different protocol correcting Bohr's version that confirms the EPR dilemma: Quantum mechanics is either incomplete or non-local.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-11T14:54:34Z) - A Time-Symmetric Resolution of the Einstein's Boxes Paradox [0.0]
I explain the paradox using the Copenhagen Formulation.
I then show how a time-symmetric formulation of quantum mechanics resolves the paradox in the way envisioned by Einstein and de Broglie.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-06-17T23:50:11Z) - Quantum time dilation in a gravitational field [39.58317527488534]
We investigate how the superposition principle affects the gravitational time dilation observed by a simple clock.
We show that the emission rate of an atom prepared in a coherent superposition of separated wave packets in a gravitational field is different from the emission rate of an atom in a classical mixture of these packets.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-04-22T10:02:21Z) - Einstein's photon box revisited [0.0]
We present a reformulation of Bohr's analysis of Einstein's thought experiment with the photon box.
We will discuss two other proposals to solve the apparent inconsistency without invoking the theory of general relativity.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-12-29T17:18:14Z) - Quantum Battles in Attoscience -- Tunnelling [58.720142291102135]
This article presents a cross section of current perspectives on the interpretation, computational modelling, and numerical investigation of tunnelling processes in attosecond physics as debated in the Quantum Battles in Attoscience virtual workshop 2020.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-07-21T13:58:12Z) - Quantum time dilation in atomic spectra [62.997667081978825]
We demonstrate how quantum time dilation manifests in a spontaneous emission process.
The resulting emission rate differs when compared to the emission rate of an atom prepared in a mixture of momentum wave packets.
We argue that spectroscopic experiments offer a technologically feasible platform to explore the effects of quantum time dilation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-06-17T18:03:38Z) - Reply to "Comment on "Quantum Time Crystals from Hamiltonians with
Long-Range Interactions"" [23.87373187143897]
In this reply we answer one-by-one all questions raised in the discussion.
As for the ideological dispute, it brightly highlights a bizarre nature of time crystalline order in closed quantum systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-05-13T13:51:01Z) - Quantum time dilation: A new test of relativistic quantum theory [91.3755431537592]
A novel quantum time dilation effect is shown to arise when a clock moves in a quantum superposition of two relativistic velocities.
This effect is argued to be measurable using existing atomic interferometry techniques, potentially offering a new test of relativistic quantum theory.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-04-22T19:26:53Z) - Joseph Polchinski: A Biographical Memoir [68.8204255655161]
Polchinski was one of the the leading theoretical physicists of the past 50 years.
His work on D-branes revolutionized string theory and led to the discovery of a nonperturbative quantum theory of gravity.
His recent, incisive reformulation of the black hole information paradox presents us with a profound challenge.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-02-06T17:18:59Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.