Switch to: References

Citations of:

Conservation, the sum rule and confirmation

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

Add citations

You must login to add citations.

Experimental tests of the sum rule.M. L. G. Redhead - 1981 - Philosophy of Science 48 (1):50-64.details Recent discussions of experimental tests of the Sum Rule have been carried out in the context of the special circumstances attending the Cross-Ramsey experiment. A more general analysis of possible tests is presented. A technical mistake of Fine and Glymour concerned with a misunderstanding of the physics of the Cross-Ramsey experiment is explained and a detailed analysis of a thought experiment based on the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen wave function is given. It is concluded, in agreement with Fine, that scattering experiments do not (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 2 citations
Quantum realism: Naïveté is no excuse.Richard Healey - 1979 - Synthese 42 (1):121 - 144.details The work of Gleason and of Kochen and Specker has been thought to refute a naïve realist approach to quantum mechanics. The argument of this paper substantially bears out this conclusion. The assumptions required by their work are not arbitrary, but have sound theoretical justification. Moreover, if they are false, there seems no reason why their falsity should not be demonstrable in some sufficiently ingenious experiment. Suitably interpreted, the work of Bell and Wigner may be seen to yield independent arguments (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 10 citations
The sum rule has not been tested.Nancy Cartwright - 1977 - Philosophy of Science 44 (1):107-112.details The debate between Glymour and Fine hinges in part on a comparison of the width of the incoming wave packet in momentum space with the angles intercepted by the detectors in the Cross-Ramsey experiment. As Fine argues, it follows from the quantum formalism that the initial dispersion will be conserved in Compton scattering, and he allows that the Sum Rule is constrained by the statistical results of quantum mechanics. The Sum Rule may fail, but it will not fail in any (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 2 citations
Nonlocality and the Kochen-Specker paradox.Peter Heywood & Michael L. G. Redhead - 1983 - Foundations of Physics 13 (5):481-499.details A new proof of the impossibility of reconciling realism and locality in quantum mechanics is given. Unlike proofs based on Bell's inequality, the present work makes minimal and transparent use of probability theory and proceeds by demonstrating a Kochen-Specker type of paradox based on the value assignments to the spin components of two spatially separated spin-1 systems in the singlet state of their total spin. An essential part of the argument is to distinguish carefully two commonly confused types of contextuality; (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 42 citations

1