Quantum and classical descriptions of a measuring apparatus

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 58, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 116-122

  Hay, Ori ^a   Peres, Asher ^a  

^a TECHNION ISRAEL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0001686594     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.58.116     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. N. Bohr, in Albert Einstein, Philosopher-Scientist, edited by P. A. Schilpp (Library of Living Philosophers, Evanston, 1949), pp. 201–241: “However far the phenomena transcend the scope of classical physical explanation(Formula presented) the account of the experimental arrangement and the results of the observations must be expressed in unambiguous language, with the terminology of classical physics.”
2. N. Bohr, in New Theories in Physics (International Institute of International Cooperation, Paris, 1939), pp. 11–45: “In the system to which the quantum mechanical formalism is applied, it is of course possible to include any intermediate auxiliary agency employed in the measuring process [but] some ultimate measuring instruments must always be described entirely on classical lines, and consequently kept outside the system subject to quantum mechanical treatment.”
3. Quantum Theory and Measurement, edited by J. A. Wheeler and W. H. Zurek (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1983).
4. J. Bub, Interpreting the Quantum World (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997).
5. J. von Neumann, Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik (Springer, Berlin, 1932) [translated by R. T. Beyer, Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1955)].
6. A. Peres, Quantum Theory: Concepts and Methods (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1993), p. 376.
7. M. Hillery, R. F. O’Connell, M. O. Scully, and E. P. Wigner, Phys. Rep. 106, 121 (1984). See in particular pp. 132–134.PRPLCM
8. E. Wigner, Phys. Rev. 40, 749 (1932).PHRVAO
9. P. Carruthers and M. M. Nieto, Rev. Mod. Phys. 40, 411 (1968).RMPHAT
10. J. R. Torgerson and L. Mandel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 3939 (1996).PRLTAO
11. L. L. Salcedo, Phys. Rev. A 54, 3657 (1996).PLRAAN
12. O. V. Prezhdo and V. V. Kisil, Phys. Rev. A 56, 162 (1997), and references therein.PLRAAN
13. R. J. Glauber, Phys. Rev. 131, 2766 (1963).PHRVAO
14. J. B. Whitenton (private communication).
15. B. C. Berndt, Ramanujan’s Notebooks (Springer, New York, 1985), Vol. I, p. 58.
16. Handbook of Mathematical Functions, edited by M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun (Dover, New York, 1972), pp. 375–377.
17. W. H. Zurek, Phys. Today 44(10), 36 (1991): PHTOAD
18. Phys. TodayW. H. Zurek 46(4), 13 (1993).
19. A. Peres, Phys. Rev. D 22, 879 (1980).PRVDAQ
20. N. D. Cartwright, Physica A 83, 210 (1976). PHYADX