Conservation, the sum rule and confirmation

Philosophy of Science 44 (1):95-106 (1977)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In 1924, Bohr, Kramers and Slater tried to introduce into microphysics conservation principles that hold only on the average. This attempt was abandoned in the light of the Compton-Simon experiment. Since that time, except for a moment of doubt in 1936, it has been thought that the classical conservation laws hold in quantum theory for each individual interaction, in a way that yields the classical exchange-and-balance of momentum familiar from the laws of elastic collisions. It has been thought, that is, that in each individual “collision” what one part of the total system loses in linear momentum another part gains, so as to maintain the same total amount afterwards as before. To those familiar with discussions of the interpretation of quantum theory, however, it will be apparent that the very concepts needed to express this idea of an elastic collision are generally not admitted in the theory. For one needs the idea that both before and after collision the total system has a well-defined value for the conserved quantity and, moreover, that the various component parts of the system have well-defined values for those quantities out of which the conserved one is composed. But in the case of spin, for example, it is customary to say that although total spin may be conserved in certain interactions one cannot attribute values to the separate components of spin because the associated operators do not commute. Moreover, one does not generally refer to the values of quantities except in eigenstates. Hence, in general, one would not refer to the value of the conserved quantity before and after interaction, except for interactions initiated in eigenstates.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 94,045

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Nonconservation of momentum in classical mechanics.Chunghyoung Lee - 2011 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 42 (1):68-73.
The sum rule is well-confirmed.Clark Glymour - 1977 - Philosophy of Science 44 (1):86-94.
Wavefunction Collapse and Conservation Laws.Philip Pearle - 2000 - Foundations of Physics 30 (8):1145-1160.
The sum rule has not been tested.Nancy Cartwright - 1977 - Philosophy of Science 44 (1):107-112.
Losing energy in classical, relativistic and quantum mechanics.David Atkinson - 2006 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 38 (1):170-180.
Causation and Space-Time.Vincent Lam - 2005 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 27 (3/4):465 - 478.
Losing energy in classical, relativistic and quantum mechanics.David Atkinson - 2007 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 38 (1):170-180.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
29 (#539,221)

6 months
10 (#382,354)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Arthur Fine
University of Washington

Citations of this work

Quantum realism: Naïveté is no excuse.Richard Healey - 1979 - Synthese 42 (1):121 - 144.
Experimental tests of the sum rule.M. L. G. Redhead - 1981 - Philosophy of Science 48 (1):50-64.
The sum rule has not been tested.Nancy Cartwright - 1977 - Philosophy of Science 44 (1):107-112.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The sum rule is well-confirmed.Clark Glymour - 1977 - Philosophy of Science 44 (1):86-94.

Add more references