Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Notes on qm interpretation

  1. Dec 21, 2013 #1
    Does anyone know good notes or a book on quantum mechanics that covers well the interpretational issues? Especially, which deals also with the last fifty or sixty years, i.e. that has Bell, decoherence, GHZ, Aspect experiment, Mach-Zehnder interferometer, delayed-choice, mesocopic Schrödinger cats, Bohm wave mechanics, many-world interpretation, etc. in it.

    And a text/ notes that perhaps covers these topics in a more or less down-to-earth pedagogical manner.

    I already looked hard, but for strange reasons I could not come up with any findings.

    thanks
     
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2013
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 21, 2013 #2

    vanhees71

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    2016 Award

    I think Ballentines book is a good no-nonsense source for studying such questions:

    L. Ballentine, Quantum Mechanics - A modern approach

    Another one is

    A. Peres, Quantum Theory: Concepts and Methods
     
  4. Dec 21, 2013 #3

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_quantum_mechanics

    references herein.

    ------

    http://plato.stanford.edu/
     
  5. Dec 21, 2013 #4

    bhobba

    Staff: Mentor

    What was it Meatloaf said - you took the words right out of my mouth.

    Ballentine also develops QM axiomatically from just two axioms. Interestingly the second is more or less implied by the first by Gleason's Theorem:
    http://kof.physto.se/theses/helena-master.pdf

    Strange, but true - it really involves just one axiom - the rest follows from rather innocuous observations such as Schrodingers equation etc comes from probabilities should be coordinate independent ie symmetry.

    Intrigued - get the book - it had a BIG effect on me - its basically the finest book on QM I have ever read.

    After that check out Decoherence and the Quantum-to-Classical Transition by Schlosshauer:
    https://www.amazon.com/Decoherence-Classical-Transition-Frontiers-Collection/dp/3540357734

    It examines interpretations in light of the recent advances in decoherence which Ballentine doesn't explore.

    Thanks
    Bill
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 6, 2017
  6. Dec 23, 2013 #5

    Demystifier

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    My recommendations:
    https://www.amazon.com/The-New-Quantum-Age-Teleportation/dp/0199589135/ref=pd_sim_b_12
    https://www.amazon.com/Do-Really-Understand-Quantum-Mechanics/dp/110702501X

    If you want something free, then:
    http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0209123
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 6, 2017
  7. Dec 23, 2013 #6

    stevendaryl

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Just a warning: If people simply post links to articles about the interpretation of quantum mechanics, that's fine. But if you actually discuss the interpretation of quantum mechanics, the thread will be closed by the moderators. At least, that's my observation.
     
  8. Dec 23, 2013 #7

    Demystifier

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    If you discuss some specific interpretation at a thread which is from the beginning opened to be a thread on that specific interpretation, it is usually not closed by the moderators.
     
  9. Dec 23, 2013 #8
    Thanks everybody!

    Funny (or not so), after two hours searching the internet, I also felt these two books look best. Unfortunately, the "New quantum age" book has no working kindle format, only "Kindle for PC". I thought about downloading the second book, but now I will look first at the pdf of the same author from the link you gave. Thanks!!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 6, 2017
  10. Dec 23, 2013 #9

    vanhees71

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    2016 Award

    Are "interpretation of QM" threads really closed that quickly here in the forum? I've not that impression. However, the problem is that often such discussions leave the realm of hard sciences (physics) and enter the more philosophical kind ("cargo cult science", as Feynman called it). Then, of course, it's good when the moderators close the thread ;-)).
     
  11. Dec 23, 2013 #10

    stevendaryl

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    I don't know about soon, but they are all closed eventually--long before they die from lack of new posts.
     
  12. Dec 23, 2013 #11

    DrChinese

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    If they are going around in circles (which happens almost immediately in many): expect them to be closed more quickly than previously. Ditto for the extended debates about Bell, closed loopholes, etc. that seem to recur all too often and degrade into statements of personal opinion.
     
  13. Dec 23, 2013 #12
    At any rate, i am convinced that the Mentor does not play dice with these threads.
     
  14. Dec 23, 2013 #13

    DevilsAvocado

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Determinism usually is a good closure...
     
  15. Dec 23, 2013 #14

    Nugatory

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Usually they're brain-dead from oxygen and new-insight starvation before they run out of new posts.
     
  16. Dec 23, 2013 #15

    DevilsAvocado

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

  17. Dec 23, 2013 #16

    Dale

    Staff: Mentor

    This is the main reason that interpretation threads are closed. Once everyone has had a chance to advertise for their favorite interpretation the rest of the discussion rapidly devolves into a shouting match about why their favorite is wonderful and why the other person's favorite is stupid.
     
  18. Dec 23, 2013 #17

    bhobba

    Staff: Mentor

    That's my feeling as well.

    They aren't closed until everyone has had a chance to put their view, and in the past some have degenerated into philosophy. Personally I think the mods do a really good job monitoring that.

    The only other observation I will make is a personal one about decoherence - I seem to go over the same thing again and again. The positive is the issues are really clear in my mind from that practice and I know the references off pat.

    Thanks
    Bill
     
  19. Dec 23, 2013 #18

    DevilsAvocado

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Yup, I have a very close friend (won't drop names due to discretion o:)) who basically thinks it's all pretty silly, and that the whole business have more in common with "religious war" (experiments is a waste of time since we all get the same results), than fundamental science.

    Maybe he's right, I dunno? :rolleyes:
     
  20. Dec 23, 2013 #19

    bhobba

    Staff: Mentor

    He is right :wink: :wink: :wink:

    But its interesting understanding and comparing them.

    Thanks
    Bill
     
  21. Dec 23, 2013 #20

    100 % concur.
    pompous proselytism, apodictical dogmatism.

    i think, various interpretations have possible and real experimental testing, so we have to discourse in that possibilities.
    or we have to diferentiate among stand alone models and interpretations.

    clear and cut, scientific standing.


    .
     
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2013
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Notes on qm interpretation
  1. Interpretations of QM? (Replies: 16)

  2. QM Interpretations (Replies: 17)

  3. QM Interpretations (Replies: 101)

  4. Interpretations of QM (Replies: 7)

  5. QM Interpretations (Replies: 27)

Loading...