EPR: The correlations are still a mystery

Philosophy of Science 55 (4):631-639 (1988)
  Copy   BIBTEX


This paper is a critical discussion of a recent article by Bas van Fraassen in which he suggests the following view: we should admit that we have no explanation of the EPR correlations, but refuse to consider the correlations as mysterious nevertheless. We shall focus on just three of the claims made by van Fraassen in support of this view. The three claims are these:The EPR correlations cannot be explained by signals being transmitted from one component of an EPR compound to the other.There is, in the EPR situation, no empirically verifiable action at a distance.The demand for an explanation of the EPR correlations is similar to the Aristotelian demand of the post-Newtonian proponents of the law of inertia to explain what keeps a body moving if there are no forces impressed on it.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 79,857

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

Causation, Measurement Relevance and No-conspiracy in EPR.Iñaki San Pedro - 2012 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 2 (1):137-156.
Causation, measurement relevance and no-conspiracy in EPR.Iñaki San Pedro - 2012 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 2 (1):137-156.
Should we explain the EPR correlations causally?Andrew Elby - 1992 - Philosophy of Science 59 (1):16-25.
Causation, robustness, and EPR.Richard A. Healey - 1992 - Philosophy of Science 59 (2):282-292.
Causal inference in quantum mechanics: A reassessment.Mauricio Suárez - 2007 - In Frederica Russo & Jon Williamson (eds.), Causality and Probability in the Sciences. College Publications. pp. 65-106.


Added to PP

32 (#379,804)

6 months
3 (#242,557)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?