- #1

- 111

- 12

I know this is a very general question, but I'm hoping someone well-versed in quantum theory is willing to provide an (appropriately general) answer.

Whilst investigating unrelated matters today I ran into a, "

Whilst investigating unrelated matters today I ran into a, "

*Brief Introduction to Consistent (Decoherent) Histories*" which read (in part):The above makes such an interpretation sound like a silver bullet against the ambiguities that appear pandemic to these kinds of discussions. From what little I've gathered on the topic (just in the course of other inquiries), I thought rigorously defining such histories (and identifying when decoherence takes over, etc.) was"The consistent histories approach combines wave functions and probabilities in a fully consistent way which does not rely upon the use of measurements"..."Histories can be used to describe how a particle interacts with a measuring apparatus, and how the outcome of a measurement (e.g., the position of a pointer) is related to some property of the particle before the measurement took place. However, they can also be employed for a single particle, or any number of particles, in the absence of any measurement. For example, by using consistent histories it is possible to assign a probability for the time at which an unstable particle, such as a radioactive atom, will decay, even if it is out in interstellar space far from any measuring device."

__not[/] a trivial task. Can anyone tell me what the quoted author has left out, or the thinking behind such a rosy picture?__

Thanks

Jeff

[source:http://quantum.phys.cmu.edu/CHS/histories.html] [Broken]Thanks

Jeff

[source:http://quantum.phys.cmu.edu/CHS/histories.html] [Broken]

Last edited by a moderator: