Paul Tappenden
Biographic Data
| ID | 1312258 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Paul Tappenden |
| GIVEN NAMES | Paul |
| FAMILY NAME | Tappenden |
| SIGNATURE | TAPPENDEN P |
| AFFILIATIONS | Winterthur Museum Garden and Library |
| ORCID | 0000-0001-8457-8413 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 5 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 12 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 5 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2000 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2021 |
| H-INDEX | 2 |
Everettian theory as pure wave mechanics plus a no-collapse probability postulate
Objective probability and the mind-body relation
Evidence and Uncertainty in Everett’s Multiverse
How does it come about then, that great scientists such as Einstein, Schrödinger and De Broglie are nevertheless dissatisfied with the situation? Of course, all these objections are levelled not against the correctness of the formulae, but against their interpretation. [...] The lesson to be learned from what I have told of the origin of quantum mechanics is that probable refinements of mathematical methods will not suffice to produce a satisfact…
Saunders and Wallace on Everett and Lewis
Simon Saunders and David Wallace attempt to use a modified form of David Lewis's analysis of personal fission to ground the claim that prior to undergoing Everett branching an informed subject can be uncertain about which outcome s/he will observe. I argue that a central assumption of this seductive idea is questionable despite appearing innocuous and that at the very least further argument is needed in support of it.
Identity and Probability in Everett's Multiverse
There are currently several versions of Everett's relative state interpretation of quantum mechanics, responding to a number of perceived problems for the original proposal. One of those problems is whether Everett's idea is in accord with the standard 'probabilistic' interpretation implicit in the Born rule. I argue in defence of what appears to be Everett's original view on this. The contribution I aim to make is a more complete discussion of t…
Evidence and Uncertainty in Everett’s Multiverse
How does it come about then, that great scientists such as Einstein, Schrödinger and De Broglie are nevertheless dissatisfied with the situation? Of course, all these objections are levelled not against the correctness of the formulae, but against their interpretation. [...] The lesson to be learned from what I have told of the origin of quantum mechanics is that probable refinements of mathematical methods will not suffice to produce a satisfact…
Saunders and Wallace on Everett and Lewis
Simon Saunders and David Wallace attempt to use a modified form of David Lewis's analysis of personal fission to ground the claim that prior to undergoing Everett branching an informed subject can be uncertain about which outcome s/he will observe. I argue that a central assumption of this seductive idea is questionable despite appearing innocuous and that at the very least further argument is needed in support of it.
Identity and Probability in Everett's Multiverse
There are currently several versions of Everett's relative state interpretation of quantum mechanics, responding to a number of perceived problems for the original proposal. One of those problems is whether Everett's idea is in accord with the standard 'probabilistic' interpretation implicit in the Born rule. I argue in defence of what appears to be Everett's original view on this. The contribution I aim to make is a more complete discussion of t…
Identity and Probability in Everett's Multiverse
There are currently several versions of Everett's relative state interpretation of quantum mechanics, responding to a number of perceived problems for the original proposal. One of those problems is whether Everett's idea is in accord with the standard 'probabilistic' interpretation implicit in the Born rule. I argue in defence of what appears to be Everett's original view on this. The contribution I aim to make is a more complete discussion of t…
Saunders and Wallace on Everett and Lewis
Simon Saunders and David Wallace attempt to use a modified form of David Lewis's analysis of personal fission to ground the claim that prior to undergoing Everett branching an informed subject can be uncertain about which outcome s/he will observe. I argue that a central assumption of this seductive idea is questionable despite appearing innocuous and that at the very least further argument is needed in support of it.
Evidence and Uncertainty in Everett’s Multiverse
How does it come about then, that great scientists such as Einstein, Schrödinger and De Broglie are nevertheless dissatisfied with the situation? Of course, all these objections are levelled not against the correctness of the formulae, but against their interpretation. [...] The lesson to be learned from what I have told of the origin of quantum mechanics is that probable refinements of mathematical methods will not suffice to produce a satisfact…
Objective probability and the mind-body relation
Everettian theory as pure wave mechanics plus a no-collapse probability postulate
Epistemology (5 works) · Philosophy (5 works) · Interpretations of quantum mechanics (4 works) · Mathematical economics (4 works) · Mathematics (4 works) · Philosophy and History of Science (4 works) · Philosophy and Theoretical Science (4 works) · Physics (4 works) · Quantum (4 works) · Quantum mechanics (4 works)