We have previously objected to modal interpretations of quantum theory by showing that these interpretations do not assign outcomes to non-ideal measurements. Bub and Healey replied (in this journal) by offering alternative accounts of non-ideal measurements. In this paper we argue, first, that our account of non-ideal measurements is correct and, second, even if it is not correct, it is overwhelmingly likely that interactions satisfying our characterization of non-ideal measurements actually occur and that such interactions possess outcomes. A successful defense of the modal interpretation must assign outcomes to these interactions or show that they do not have outcomes or show that in fact they never occur. Bub and Healey show none of this.
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Physics and Astronomy(all)
- foundations of quantum theory
- non-ideal measurements
- the measurement problem
- the modal interpretation