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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In this paper we attempt to analyze the physical and philosophical meaning ofquantum contextuality. We will argue that there exists a general confusionwithin the foundational literature arising from the improper "scrambling" oftwo different meanings of quantum contextuality. While the first one,introduced by Bohr, is related to an epistemic interpretation of contextualitywhich stresses the incompatibility (or complementarity) of certain measurementsituations described in classical terms; the second meaning of contextuality isrelated to a purely formal understanding of contextuality as exposed by theKochen-Specker (KS) theorem which focuses instead on the constraints of theorthodox quantum formalism in order to interpret projection operators aspreexistent or actual (definite valued) properties. We will show how these twonotions have been scrambled together creating an "omelette of contextuality"which has been fully widespread through a popularized "epistemic explanation"of the KS theorem according to which: The measurement outcome of the observableA when measured together with B or together with C will necessarily differ incase [A, B] = [A, C] = 0, and [B, C] /= 0. We will show why this statement isnot only improperly scrambling epistemic and formal perspectives, but is alsophysically and philosophically meaningless. Finally, we analyze theconsequences of such widespread epistemic reading of KS theorem as related tostatistical statements of measurement outcomes.

Unscrambling the Omelette of Quantum Contextuality (PART 1): Preexistent Properties or Measurement Outcomes?