- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen, and Shannon
Foundations of Physics 35 (3):511-514 (2005)
Abstract
The Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox (1935) is reexamined in the light of Shannon’s information theory (1984). The EPR argument did not take into account that the observer’s information was localized, like any other physical object.Other Versions
No versions found
Links
PhilArchive
External links
(no proxy)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Through your library
- Sign in / register and customize your OpenURL resolver
- Configure custom resolver
My notes
Similar books and articles
Multinomial Distribution, Quantum Statistics and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Like Phenomena.Ratan Dasgupta & Sisir Roy - 2008 - Foundations of Physics 38 (4):384-394.
The physics of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox.B. H. Kellett - 1977 - Foundations of Physics 7 (9-10):735-757.
A relativistic formulation of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox.Gerrit J. Smith & Robert Weingard - 1987 - Foundations of Physics 17 (2):149-171.
Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Correct?Gilles Brassard & André Allan Méthot - 2010 - Foundations of Physics 40 (4):463-468.
The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox Reexamined.Gen-Ichiro Nagasaka - 1970 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1970:437 - 445.
A quantum similarity discussion about Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen (EPR) paradox in Gaussian enfolded spaces.Jing Chang & Ramon Carbó-Dorca - 2020 - Journal of Mathematical Chemistry 58:1815–1827.
Analytics
Added to PP
2013-10-30
Downloads
219 (#117,715)
6 months
13 (#270,984)
2013-10-30
Downloads
219 (#117,715)
6 months
13 (#270,984)
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Is the Epistemic View of Quantum Mechanics Incomplete?M. Ferrero, D. Salgado & J. L. Sánchez-Gómez - 2004 - Foundations of Physics 34 (12):1993-2003.
Teaching the Philosophical Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Chemistry Through Controversies.Andoni Garritz - 2013 - Science & Education 22 (7):1787-1807.
Review: Epistemic Instrumentalism, Exceeding Our Grasp. [REVIEW]Arthur Fine - 2008 - Philosophical Studies 137 (1):135-139.
A New Book of Numbers: On the Precise Definition of Quantum Variables and the Relationships between Mathematics and Physics in Quantum Theory. [REVIEW]Arkady Plotnitsky - 2006 - Foundations of Physics 36 (1):30-60.
References found in this work
Philoophical Consequences of Quantum Theory.James T. Cushing & Ernan McMullin (eds.) - 1989 - University of Notre Dame Press.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-648784bb4d-82spv uwo