Einstein, Incompleteness, and the Epistemic View of Quantum States

By Nicholas M. Harrigan, Robert W. Spekkens. 2007

546 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Does the quantum state represent reality or our knowledge of reality? In making this distinction precise, we are led to a novel classification of hidden variable models of quantum theory. We show that representatives of each class can be found among existing constructions for two-dimensional Hilbert spaces. Our approach also provides a fruitful new perspective on arguments for the nonlocality and incompleteness of quantum theory. Specifically, we show that for models wherein the quantum state has the status of something real, the failure of locality can be established through an argument considerably more straightforward than Bell’s theorem. The historical significance of this result becomes evident when one recognizes that the same reasoning is present in Einstein’s preferred argument for incompleteness, which dates back to 1935. This fact suggests that Einstein was seeking not just any completion of quantum theory, but one wherein quantum states are solely representative of our knowledge. Our hypothesis is supported by an analysis of Einstein’s attempts to clarify his views on quantum theory and the circumstance of his otherwise puzzling abandonment of an even simpler argument for incompleteness from 1927.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics, Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fb5641bac4d4d6aab0378795732c55a611c9bed9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

In Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics

In Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

Citations in the corpus

Is the Quantum State Real? An Extended Review of -ontology Theorems (2014, methodology): “Gaussian functions are in fact positive so in this case W(x, p) can be regarded as a probability distribution and unsurprisingly these are the epistemic states in Spekkens’ continuous variable theory, with the ontic states being the phase space points (x, p).”
QBism, the Perimeter of Quantum Bayesianism (2010, background): “What is it that A and B are spatially distant things but that they are causally independent? This notion, in Einstein’s hands,(25) led to one of the nicest, most direct arguments that quantum states cannot be states of reality, but must be something more like states of information, knowledge, expect”