Quick Navigation

Topics

Open Quantum Systems Decoherence Quantum Foundations

Comment on "Spontaneous collapse: A solution to the measurement problem and a source of the decay in mesonic systems"

arXiv
Authors: Antoine Tilloy

Year

2017

Paper ID

25234

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

102

Citations

N/A

Abstract

In a recent article [Phys. Rev. A 94, 052128 (2016)], the authors compute the predictions of two collapse models on the transition probabilities of neutral mesons. Notably, they claim to find an influence on the decay rates and attempt to prove that a new parameter θ(0) is required to fully characterize the noise of standard collapse models. These two claims are incorrect and motivated by flawed computations. This comment derives the correct transition probabilities exactly from the master equation, explains how they could be computed perturbatively in a safe way and finally shows where the main mistake of the authors of the original article was made.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2017 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • In a recent article [Phys.

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #25234 #69040 Collective Emission in LH2 Asse... #69036 CARVE-Q: Quantum-Proposed, Clas... #69035 A Modular Approach to Succinct ... #69031 Amplitude-dependent quantum hyd...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Sign in to react to this paper.

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.