Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-22T14:48:20.732Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Can Quantum Mechanics be Formulated as a Classical Probability Theory?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Leon Cohen
Leon Cohen*
Affiliation:
Yale University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It is shown that quantum mechanics cannot be formulated as a stochastic theory involving a probability distribution function of position and momentum. This is done by showing that the most general distribution function which yields the proper quantum mechanical marginal distributions cannot consistently be used to predict the expectations of observables if phase space integration is used. Implications relating to the possibility of establishing a “hidden” variable theory of quantum mechanics are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 33 , Issue 4 , December 1966 , pp. 317 - 322
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1966

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1] Baker, G. H. Jr., Phys. Rev. 69, 2198 (1959).Google Scholar
[2] Bohm, D., Phys. Rev. 85, 166 (1952).Google Scholar
[3] Bopp, F., Ann. L'Inst. H. Poincaré, Tome XV 81 (1956).Google Scholar
[4] Bopp, F., Observation and Interpretation in the Philosophy of Physics, Edited by S. Korner. Dover Publications, Inc. New York 1957.Google Scholar
[5] Cohen, L., J. Math. Phys., 7, 781 (1966).Google Scholar
[6] Cohen, L., Thesis, Yale University 1966, University Microfilm, Ann. Arbor, Michigan.Google Scholar
[7] Groenwold, H. G., Physica 12, 405 (1946).Google Scholar
[8] Margenau, H. and Hill, R. N., Prog. Theo. Phys. 26, 722 (1961).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9] Marcenau, H., Phil. of Sci. 30, 1 (1963); 138 (1963).Google Scholar
[10] Margenau, H., Annals of Physics 23, 469 (1963).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11] Moyal, J. E., Proc. Cambridge Phil. Soc. 45, 99 (1949).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12] Rubin, H., Proc. International Symposium on Axiomatic Method (North-Holland Publishing Co., Inc., Amsterdam, 1959).Google Scholar
[13] Suppes, P., Phil. of Sci. 28, 378 (1961).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14] Takabayasi, T., Prog. Theo. Phys. 11, 341 (1954).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15] Wigner, E., Phys. Rev. 40, 749 (1932).CrossRefGoogle Scholar