RECORD
Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics Is Incorrect
Quantum Physics · Submitted 13 Sep 2005
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim Although most physicists consider Einstein's criticism technically unfounded, we show that the Copenhagen interpretation is actually incorrect, since Born's probability explanation of the wave function is incorrect due to a false assumption on "continuous probabilities" in modern probability theory.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
(A point-by-point response to a comment (quant-ph/0509130) on our paper (quant-ph/0509089) is added as Appendix C. We find the comment incorrect.) Einstein's criticism of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics is an important part of his legacy. Although most physicists consider Einstein's criticism technically unfounded, we show that the Copenhagen interpretation is actually incorrect, since Born's probability explanation of the wave function is incorrect due to a false assumption on "continuous probabilities" in modern probability theory. "Continuous probability" means a "probability measure" that can take every value in a subinterval of the unit interval (0, 1). We prove that such "continuous probabilities" are invalid. Since Bell's inequality also assumes "continuous probabilities", the result of the experimental test of Bell's inequality is not evidence supporting the Copenhagen interpretation. Although successful applications of quantum mechanics and explanation of quantum phenomena do not necessarily rely on the Copenhagen interpretation, the question asked by Einstein 70 years ago, i.e., whether a complete description of reality exists, still remains open.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | (A point-by-point response to a comment (quant-ph/0509130) on our paper (quant-ph/0509089) is added as Appendix C. | background 0.56 | 0.57 | 0.01 | asserted 0.62 |
| s1 | We find the comment incorrect.) Einstein's criticism of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics is an important part of his legacy. | background 0.94 | 0.49 | 0.04 | asserted 0.97 |
| s2 | Although most physicists consider Einstein's criticism technically unfounded, we show that the Copenhagen interpretation is actually incorrect, since Born's probability explanation of the wave function is incorrect due to a false assumption on "continuous probabilities" in modern probability theory. | result 0.81 | 0.90 | 0.94 | asserted 1.00 |
| s3 | "Continuous probability" means a "probability measure" that can take every value in a subinterval of the unit interval (0, 1). | background 0.64 | 0.27 | 0.03 | asserted 1.00 |
| s4 | We prove that such "continuous probabilities" are invalid. | result 0.82 | 0.94 | 0.21 | asserted 1.00 |
| s5 | Since Bell's inequality also assumes "continuous probabilities", the result of the experimental test of Bell's inequality is not evidence supporting the Copenhagen interpretation. | interpretation 0.84 | 0.49 | 0.11 | asserted 1.00 |
| s6 | Although successful applications of quantum mechanics and explanation of quantum phenomena do not necessarily rely on the Copenhagen interpretation, the question asked by Einstein 70 years ago, i.e., whether a complete description of reality exists, still remains open. | interpretation 0.76 | 0.15 | 0.07 | asserted 0.97 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v2
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
(A point-by-point response to a comment (quant-ph/0509130) on our paper (quant-ph/0509089) is added as Appendix C. We find the comment incorrect.) Einstein's criticism of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics is an important part of his legacy. Although most physicists consider Einstein's criticism technically unfounded, we show that the Copenhagen interpretation is actually incorrect, since Born's probability explanation of the wave function is incorrect due to a false assumption on "continuous probabilities" in modern probability theory. "Continuous probability" means a "probability measure" that can take every value in a subinterval of the unit interval (0, 1). We prove that such "continuous probabilities" are invalid. Since Bell's inequality also assumes "continuous probabilities", the result of the experimental test of Bell's inequality is not evidence supporting the Copenhagen interpretation. Although successful applications of quantum mechanics and explanation of quantum phenomena do not necessarily rely on the Copenhagen interpretation, the question asked by Einstein 70 years ago, i.e., whether a complete description of reality exists, still remains open.
Human review
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.