Foundations of Physics 38 (10):916-922 (2008)

Schlosshauer has criticized the conclusion of Wiebe and Ballentine (Phys. Rev. A 72:022109, 2005) that decoherence is not essential for the emergence of classicality from quantum mechanics. I reply to the issues raised in his critique, which range from the interpretation of quantum mechanics to the criterion for classicality, and conclude that the role of decoherence in these issues is much more restricted than is often claimed
Keywords Classicality in quantum mechanics  Decoherence  Interpretation of state vector
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10701-008-9242-0
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,163
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Limitations of the Projection Postulate.L. E. Ballentine - 1990 - Foundations of Physics 20 (11):1329-1343.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

On the Quantum Mechanical Measurement Process.H. W. L. Naus - 2021 - Foundations of Physics 51 (1):1-13.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Decoherence and the Copenhagen Cut.Scott Tanona - 2013 - Synthese 190 (16):3625-3649.
Decoherence and Wave Function Collapse.Roland Omnès - 2011 - Foundations of Physics 41 (12):1857-1880.
Decoherence: The View From the History and the Philosophy of Science.Amit Hagar - 2012 - Phil. Trans. Royal Soc. London A 375 (1975).
The 'Decoherence' Approach to the Measurement Problem in Quantum Mechanics.Andrew Elby - 1994 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:355 - 365.


Added to PP index

Total views
76 ( #152,056 of 2,506,511 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #170,106 of 2,506,511 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes