A New Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

Abstract Full-Text HTML Download Download as PDF (Size:245KB) PP. 35-42
DOI: 10.4236/jqis.2011.12005    7,722 Downloads   21,068 Views   Citations
Author(s)    Leave a comment


The Copenhagen interpretation is the most authorized interpretation of quantum mechanics, but there are a number of ideas that are associated with the Copenhagen interpretation. It is ceratin that this fact is not necessarily desirable. Thus, we propose a new interpretation of measurement theory, which is the linguistic aspect (or, the mathematical generalization) of quantum mechanics. Although this interpretation is superficially similar to a part of so-called Copenhagen interpretation, we show that it has a merit to be applicable to both quantum and classical systems. For example, we say that Bell’s inequality is broken even in classical systems.

Cite this paper

S. Ishikawa, "A New Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics," Journal of Quantum Information Science, Vol. 1 No. 2, 2011, pp. 35-42. doi: 10.4236/jqis.2011.12005.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] J. von Neumann, “Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Me-chanics,” Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1932.
[2] S. Ishikawa, “A Quantum Mechanical Mechanical Approach to Fuzzy Theory,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 90, No. 3, 1997, pp. 277-306. doi:10.1016/S0165-0114(96)00114-5
[3] S. Ishikawa, “Statistics in Measurements,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 116, No. 2, 2000, pp. 141-154. doi:10.1016/S0165-0114(98)00280-2
[4] S. Ishikawa, “Mathematical Foundations of Measurement Theory,” Keio University Press Inc., 2006, 335 Pages. http://www.keioup.co.jp/kup/mfomt/).
[5] S. Ishikawa, “A New Formulation of Measurement Theory,” Far East Journal of Dynamical Systems, Vol. 10, No. 1, 2008, pp. 107-117.
[6] K. Kikuchi, S. Ishikawa, “Psychological tests in measurement theory,” Far East Journal of Theoretical Statis-tics, Vol. 32, No. 1, 2010, pp. 81-99.
[7] S. Sakai, “C*-Algebras and W*-Algebras,” Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete (Band 60), Springer- Verlag, Berlin, 1971.
[8] E.B. Davies, “Quantum Theory of Open Systems,” Academic Press, Cambridge, 1976.
[9] A. Kolmogorov, “Foundations of Probability (Translation),” Chelsea Publishing Co., 1950.
[10] J.S. Bell, “On the Einstein-Podolosky-Rosen Paradox,” Physics, Vol. 1, 1966, pp. 195-200.
[11] F. Selleri, “Die Debatte um die Quantentheorie,” Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn Verlagsgesellscvhaft MBH, Braunschweig, 1983.
[12] S. Ishi-kawa, “Uncertainty Relation in Simultaneous Measurements for Arbitrary Observables,” Reports on Mathematical Physics, Vol. 9, 1991, pp. 257-273. doi:10.1016/0034-4877(91)90046-P
[13] A. Einstein, B. Podolosky and N. Rosen, “Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?” Physical Review, Vol. 47, No. 10, 1935, pp. 777-780. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.47.777
[14] N. Bohr, “Can Quan-tum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?” Physical Review, Vol. 48, 1935, pp. 696-702. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.48.696

comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2020 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.