Are GRW tails as bad as they say?

Philosophy of Science 66 (3):71 (1999)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

GRW models of the physical world are criticized in the literature for involving wave function "tails" that allegedly create fatal interpretive problems and even compromise standard arithmetic. I find such objections both unfair and misguided. But not all is well with the GRW approach. One complaint I articulate in this paper does not have to do with tails as such but with the specific way in which past physical structures linger forever in the total GRW wave function. By pushing the total proposal towards either the "Many Worlds" approach or the Bohmian approach, this feature diminishes extant GRW claims to preferability. I suggest, however, that the problem here is just an artifact of the particular and ultimately optional genre of collapse mechanism chosen by GRW

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,227

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
78 (#214,462)

6 months
12 (#220,085)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Alberto Cordero
CUNY Graduate Center

References found in this work

Quantum Non-Locality and Relativity: Aristotelian Society Series.Tim Maudlin & Lawrence Sklar - 1994 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 45 (3):933-934.
Philoophical Consequences of Quantum Theory.James T. Cushing & Ernan McMullin (eds.) - 1989 - University of Notre Dame Press.
Mind, Brain and the Quantum.Michael Lockwood - 1990 - Mind 99 (396):650-652.
Quantum Mechanics. Historical Contingency and the Copenhagen Hegemony.James T. Cushing - 1996 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 27 (2):353-358.

View all 18 references / Add more references