Corpus ID: 18888334

Bohr's Response to EPR: Criticism and Defense

@inproceedings{Fine2016BohrsRT,
  title={Bohr's Response to EPR: Criticism and Defense},
  author={A. Fine},
  year={2016}
}
In Quantum Dialogue (1999, 154), Mara Beller notes a significant shift of focus that Niels Bohr makes in responding to EPR.1 EPR appeal to measurement as sometimes sufficient in the determination of physically real properties ("elements of reality"). In his response, Bohr, while paraphrasing the words of EPR, morphs them into appeal to measurement and experiment as necessary in determining the meaning ("unambiguous meaning") of the term 'physical reality' itself (Bohr, 696). That shift opens… Expand
Did Bohr Understand EPR
In 1935, Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen (EPR) famously published a paper arguing for the incompleteness of quantum mechanics, using the example of two spatially separated but entangled particles. InExpand
Einstein Dilemma and Two-State Vector Formalism
In the famous EPR paper published in 1935, Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen suggested a thought experiment, which later became known as the “EPR experiment”. Using the EPR experiment, they posited thatExpand

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 20 REFERENCES
Reconsidering Bohr’s Reply to EPR
Although Bohr’s reply to the EPR argument is supposed to be a watershed moment in the development of his philosophy of quantum theory, it is difficult to find a clear statement of the reply’sExpand
The EPR Paper and Bohr's Response: A Re-Assessment
For many years after Bohr's response to the EPR argument, Bohr was considered to have provided an authoritative rebuttal of the ideas of the paper, and more generally of Einstein's stance on quantumExpand
The EPR Experiment: A Prelude to Bohr's Reply to EPR
Bohr’s (1935) reply to Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen’s (EPR’s) (1935) argument for the incompleteness of quantum theory is notoriously difficult to unravel. It is so diffcult, in fact, that over 60Expand
Bohr’s Response to EPR
The EPR paper (Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen, 1935; hereafter “EPR”) appeared in the May 15, 1935 issue of Physical Review. The paper’s impact was due in large part to their demonstration of anExpand
Quantum Reference Frames in the Context of EPR
Taking a cue from Bohr’s use of the notion of a reference frame in his reply to EPR’s argument against the completeness (and consistency) of standard quantum theory, this paper presents an analysisExpand
Bell's theorem
The origins of this topic is a famous paper by Einstein, Rosen and Podolsky (EPR) in 1935; its title was Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete? They consideredExpand
Non-locality and Modality
Preface. Part One: Re-Examining the Legacy of Bohr and von Neumann. Reconsidering Bohr's Reply to EPR H. Halvorson, R. Clifton. Bohr on Bell: A Proposed Reading of Bohr and Its Implications forExpand
The Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen State Maximally Violates Bell's Inequalities
In their well-known argument against the completeness of quantum theory, Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) made use of a state that strictly correlates the positions and momenta of two particles.Expand
Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?
TLDR
Consideration of the problem of making predictions concerning a system on the basis of measurements made on another system that had previously interacted with it leads to the result that one is led to conclude that the description of reality as given by a wave function is not complete. Expand
...
1
2
...