A New Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

DOI: 10.4236/jqis.2011.12005   PDF   HTML     8,036 Downloads   21,804 Views   Citations


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.

Share and Cite:

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.