Sambuco's latest activity

It is consistent. In fact, this is the type of ontology on which the relational interpretation (https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2017.0312)...

Exactly. Since charge is conserved, most physicists would say that an electron must have continuous existence. But this need not be...

That was not the idea behind my comment and the reference to Schrödinger's text. See my previous post. As I said, this depends on the...

That means that what we call a particle may not exist beyond measurements/observations/interactions. What is "real" are the detection...

Do you think that the "basic principles" of quantum theory have reached their final form? I don't. Ballentine's two postulates depend...

I would like to add that the idea that a quantum object exists at all times and possesses objective properties is nothing more than a...

The interpretation would be the conceptualization of a quantum system as a system with a definite classical configuration, evolving...

It offers a reformulation that might prove to be useful beyond foundational/conceptual questions, and there would be no problem in...

Spot on. I thini its a matter also of definition of "AOE". As I skimmed the Bong article, this was baked into their definition of AOE...

Yes, this is really very relevant! In section 4.1, it says: "Then, in Equation (3) of [9], it implicitly assumes ##p(abcd|xy) =...

That's true, but cases ii and iii correspond to situations where Alice and Bob enter their respective laboratories and ask Charlie and...

Thought these papers might be relevant to realist perspective on Wogner friend: https://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/24/7/903 Note how...

Remember though that in this formalism, the configuration a system or subsystem is in is not indexed to any observer. In which case if...

Thanks for the reference. Barandes is pretty clear about that. I was trying to understand at what exact point Bong et al. assume a...

I don't see how the bit in bold is true if dynamics are non-Markovian. [edit] - I.e.: AOE + Markovian dynamics = joint probability...