Objective probabilities, quantum counterfactuals, and the ABL rule

Abstract

The ABL rule is derived as a tool of standard quantum mechanics. The ontological significance of the existence of objective probabilities is discussed. Objections by Kastner and others to counterfactual uses of the ABL rule are refuted. Metaphysical presumptions leading to such views as Kastner is defending in her Comment are examined and shown to be unwarranted.

Submitted to American Journal of Physics; v1 responds to quant-ph/0003098v3, v2 responds to Kastner's revised submission; 32 pages, LaTeX2e

References in corpus (8)

• What is quantum mechanics trying to tell us?
• The Pondicherry interpretation of quantum mechanics
• Defending Time-Symmetrized Quantum Counterfactuals
• Quantum Mechanics and the Cookie Cutter Paradigm
• TSQT `Elements of Possibility'?
• The Three-Box "Paradox" and Other Reasons to Reject the Counterfactual Usage of the ABL Rule
• Time-Symmetrized Quantum Theory, Counterfactuals, and `Advanced Action'
• Comment on Mohrhoff's "What quantum mechanics is trying to tell us"

Cited by in corpus (16)

• Weak values and quantum properties
• The world according to quantum mechanics (or, the 18 errors of Henry P. Stapp)
• Making sense of a world of clicks
• The Pondicherry interpretation of quantum mechanics: An overview
• Why the laws of physics are just so
• This elusive objective existence
• Do quantum states evolve? Apropos of Marchildon's remarks
• Is the end in sight for theoretical pseudophysics?
• Quantum mechanics explained
• Remarks on Mohrhoff's Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics
• Reflections on the Spatiotemporal Aspects of the Quantum World
• The Counterfactual Meaning of the ABL Rule
• Two theories of decoherence
• Why physical understanding should precede the mathematical formalism - conditional quantum probabilities as a case-study
• Comment on "Quantum Physics from A to Z"
• The Utility of Time-Symmetric Quantum Counterfactuals: A Response to Kastner