English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This paper offers a critique of the Bayesian interpretation of quantummechanics with particular focus on a paper by Caves, Fuchs, and Schackcontaining a critique of the "objective preparations view" or OPV. It also aimsto carry the discussion beyond the hardened positions of Bayesians andproponents of the OPV. Several claims made by Caves et al. are rebutted,including the claim that different pure states may legitimately be assigned tothe same system at the same time, and the claim that the quantum nature of apreparation device cannot legitimately be ignored. Both Bayesians andproponents of the OPV regard the time dependence of a quantum state as thecontinuous dependence on time of an evolving state of some kind. This leads toa false dilemma: quantum states are either objective states of nature orsubjective states of belief. In reality they are neither. The present paperviews the aforesaid dependence as a dependence on the time of the measurementto whose possible outcomes the quantum state serves to assign probabilities.This makes it possible to recognize the full implications of the only testablefeature of the theory, viz., the probabilities it assigns to measurementoutcomes...Comment: 21 pages, no graphics, inspired by "Subjective probability and  quantum certainty" (quant-ph/0608190 v2

Objective Probability and Quantum Fuzziness