Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Foundations
Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations
Quantum State Preparation Representation
Open Quantum Systems Decoherence
French on London and Bauer, and QBism
arXiv
Authors: Jacques L. Pienaar
Year
2025
Paper ID
51288
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
145
Citations
N/A
Abstract
In this article I compare two interpretations of quantum mechanics (QM) that draw inspiration from phenomenology: the London-Bauer-French interpretation (hereafter LBF) as articulated by Steven French, and QBism. I give special attention to certain disagreements between QBism and LBF identified French's work, as well as French's related claims that QBism may be at odds with key ideas in phenomenology. My main finding is that QBism does not fare so badly with phenomenology as French makes out; in particular it can be made compatible with Zahavi's correlationism and Husserl's notion of intersubjectivity, both of which strongly inform LBF. Nevertheless, I concur with French's argument that QBism is incompatible with the conception of quantum measurement in LBF, hence also with that of Merleau-Ponty, as the latter based his own analysis on that of London and Bauer. I explain why I find QBism's account preferable in this case.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2025 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- In this article I compare two interpretations of quantum mechanics (QM) that draw inspiration from phenomenology: the London-Bauer-French interpretation (hereafter LBF) as...
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
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
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.