Einstein and EPR
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 10708155 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Robert J Deltete (corresponding author), Robert Deltete, Reed A Guy (0000-0002-9833-4994), Reed Guy |
| Year | 1991 |
| Volume | 58 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 377-397 |
| Publication date | 1991-09-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Philosophy of Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0031-8248 • E-ISSN: 1539-767X |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1086/289623 |
| OpenAlex | W2025822198 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 26 |
Recent studies have shown that Einstein did not write the EPR paper and that he was disappointed with the outcome. He thought, rightly, that his own argument for the incompleteness of quantum theory was badly presented in the paper. We reconstruct the argument of EPR, indicate the reasons Einstein was dissatisfied with it, and discuss Einstein's own argument. We show that many commentators have been misled by the obscurity of EPR into proposing interpretations of its argument that do not accurately represent Einstein's own views. Finally, we evaluate Einstein's own incompleteness argument, concluding that recent experimental findings have likely shown it to be unsound
Argument (complex analysis) · Einstein · Epistemology · EPR paradox · Physics · Quantum · Quantum entanglement · Quantum mechanics · Theoretical physics · Advanced Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics · Medicine · Philosophy · Quantum Information and Cryptography · Quantum Mechanics and Applications
Experimental Test of Bell's Inequalities Using Time- Varying Analyzers
Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?
Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete?
On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox
Paradigms and Paradoxes
The Chimerical Cat
Einstein on locality and separability
Two Paradoxes in Quantum Mechanics
| Citations per year | 0.09 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 1994 - 2006 (13) |
| Highly cited | No |