The lately developed part of Quantum Bayesianism named QBism has been proclaimed by its authors a powerful interpretation of Quantum Physics. This article presents analysis of some aspects of QBism. The considered examples show inconsistencies in some basic statements of the discussed interpretation. In particular, the main quantum mechanical conundrum of measurement and the observer is, contrary to the claims, not resolved within the framework of QBism. The conclusion is made that the basic tenets of QBism as applied in Physics are unsubstantiated.
Quantum Bayesianism ("QBism") has been put forward as an approach to quantum theory that avoids foundational problems by altogether disavowing the objective existence of quantum states. It is shown that QBism suffers its own versions of the familiar foundational problems, and that these QBist versions are illuminating not just for QBism, but for more traditional foundational approaches as well.
This article summarizes the Quantum Bayesian point of view of quantum mechanics, with special emphasis on the view's outer edges---dubbed QBism. QBism has its roots in personalist Bayesian probability theory, is crucially dependent upon the tools of quantum information theory, and most recently, has set out to investigate whether the physical world might be of a type sketched by some false-started philosophies of 100 years ago (pragmatism, pluralism, nonreductionism, and meliorism). Beyond conceptual issues, work at Perimeter Institute is focused on the hard technical problem of finding a good…
In QBism (or Quantum Bayesianism) a quantum state does not represent an element of physical reality but an agent's personal probability assignments, reflecting his subjective degrees of belief about the future content of his experience. In this paper, we contrast QBism with hidden-variable accounts of quantum mechanics and show the sense in which QBism explains quantum correlations. QBism's agent-centered worldview can be seen as a development of ideas expressed in Schrödinger's essay "Nature and the Greeks".
This paper is a concise summary of the main ideas presented in the companion paper `Quantum causal models via Quantum Bayesianism'[arXiv:1806.00895]. I present the proposed definition of a quantum causal model with minimal background and justification, focusing only on its essential physical properties. The mathematical structure and definitions are provided as an Appendix. I discuss the possible physical significance of the fact that the model is symmetric under causal inversion.
The interpretation of quantum mechanics known as QBism developed out of efforts to understand the probabilities arising in quantum physics as Bayesian in character. But this development was neither easy nor without casualties. Many ideas voiced, and even committed to print, during earlier stages of Quantum Bayesianism turn out to be quite fallacious when seen from the vantage point of QBism.
The purpose of this book is to explain Quantum Bayesianism ('QBism') to "people without easy access to mathematical formulas and equations" (4-5). Qbism is an interpretation of quantum mechanics that "doesn't meddle with the technical aspects of the theory [but instead] reinterprets the fundamental terms of the theory and gives them new meaning" (3). The most important motivation for QBism, enthusiastically stated on the book's cover, is that QBism provides "a way past quantum theory's paradoxes and puzzles" such that much of the weirdness associated with quantum theory "dissolves under the le…
In this short essay we reject the interpretation of quantum theory called quantum Bayesianism (Qbism) which has been promoted recently by David Mermin in his essay published in Nature. According to Qbism quantum states are personal judgements of human agents. Physicists are not verifying their personal beliefs about their observations but search for the mathematical abstract description allowing to explain and to predict in a quantitative way the regularities observed (and those to be discovered) in physical phenomena which exist independently of the presence of any agent. We reject also the c…
QBism is a recently developed version of Quantum Bayesianism. QBists think that the primitive concept of experience is the central subject of science. QBism refuses the idea that the quantum state of a system is an objective description of this system. It is a tool for assigning a subjective probability to the agent's future experience. So quantum mechanics does not directly say something about the "external world". A measurement (in the usual sense) is just a special case of what QBism calls experience and this is any action done by any agent on her external world. The result of the measureme…
Quantum Bayesianism, or QBism, is a recent development of the epistemic view of quantum states, according to which the state vector represents knowledge about a quantum system, rather than the true state of the system. QBism explicitly adopts the subjective view of probability, wherein probability assignments express an agent's personal degrees of belief about an event. QBists claim that most if not all conceptual problems of quantum mechanics vanish if we simply take a proper epistemic and probabilistic perspective. Although this judgement is largely subjective and logically consistent, I exp…
A critique to the article by C.A. Fuchs, N.D. Mermin, and R.Schack, "An introduction to QBism with and application to the locality of quantum mechanics" that appeared in Am. J. Phys. 82 (8), 749-754 (2014)
The Quantum-Bayesian interpretation of quantum theory claims to eliminate the question of quantum nonlocality. This claim is not justified, because the question of non-locality does not arise due to any interpretation of quantum theory, but due to objective experimental facts. We define the notion "objective paradox" and explain, comparing QBism and the Copenhagen interpretation, how avoidance of any paradox results into poor explanatory power of an interpretation, if there actually exists an objective paradox.
Fuchs and Peres (2000) claimed that standard Quantum Mechanics needs no interpretation. In this essay, I show the flaws of the arguments presented in support to this thesis. Specifically, it will be claimed that the authors conflate QM with Quantum Bayesianism (QBism) - the most prominent subjective formulation of quantum theory; thus, they endorse a specific interpretation of the quantum formalism. Secondly, I will explain the main reasons for which QBism should not be considered a physical theory, being it concerned exclusively with agents' beliefs and silent about the physics of the quantum…
According to the subjective Bayesian interpretation of quantum mechanics (QBism), the instruments used to measure quantum systems are to be regarded as an extension of the senses of the agent who is using them, and quantum states describe the agent's expectations for what they will experience through these extended senses. How can QBism then account for the fact that (i) instruments must be calibrated before they can be used to `sense' anything; (ii) some instruments are more precise than others; (iii) more precise instruments can lead to discovery of new systems? Furthermore, is the agent `in…
This paper represents an elaboration of the lectures delivered by one of us (CAF) during "Course 197 -- Foundations of Quantum Physics" at the International School of Physics "Enrico Fermi" in Varenna, Italy, July 2016. Much of the material for it is drawn from arXiv:1003.5209, arXiv:1401.7254, and arXiv:1405.2390. However there are substantial additions of original material in Sections 4, 7, 8 and 9, along with clarifications and expansions of the older content throughout. Topics include the meaning of subjective probability; no-cloning, teleportation, and quantum tomography from the subjecti…
Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy, LMU Munich（慕尼黑数学哲学中心，慕尼黑大学）；Department of Physics, University of Massachusetts Boston（马萨诸塞大学波士顿分校物理系）；Department of Mathematics, Royal Holloway University of London（伦敦皇家霍洛威学院数学系）
The author summarizes the Quantum Bayesian viewpoint of quantum mechanics, developed originally by C. M. Caves, R. Schack, and himself. It is a view crucially dependent upon the tools of quantum information theory. Work at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics continues the development and is focused on the hard technical problem of a finding a good representation of quantum mechanics purely in terms of probabilities, without amplitudes or Hilbert-space operators. The best candidate representation involves a mysterious entity called a symmetric informationally complete quantum measur…
This is a reply to Michael Nauenberg's arXiv:1502.00123, to be published in the American Journal of Physics, in which he comments critically on our paper "An introduction to QBism with an application to the locality of quantum mechanics", Am. J. Phys. 82, 749--754 (2014) and arXiv:1311.5253.
This paper expresses what a breath of fresh air it has been since a few phenomenological philosophers have started to engage with QBism. In service of the newfound discussion, the aim of this exposition is to lay out the structure of QBism as clearly as possible for that audience. In the process, we arrive at eight tenets for QBism: 1) A quantum state is an agent's personal judgment. 2) A quantum measurement is an agent's action upon its external world. 3) Quantum measurement outcomes are personal to the agent performing the action. 4) The quantum formalism is normative rather than descriptive…
The Bayesian approach to quantum mechanics of Caves, Fuchs and Schack is presented. Its conjunction of realism about physics along with anti-realism about much of the structure of quantum theory is elaborated; and the position defended from common objections: that it is solipsist; that it is too instrumentalist; that it cannot deal with Wigner's friend scenarios. Three more substantive problems are raised: Can a reasonable ontology be found for the approach? Can it account for explanation in quantum theory? Are subjective probabilities on their own adequate in the quantum domain? The first que…
According to QBism, quantum states, unitary evolutions, and measurement operators are all understood as personal judgments of the agent using the formalism. Meanwhile, quantum measurement outcomes are understood as the personal experiences of the same agent. Wigner's conundrum of the friend, in which two agents ostensibly have different accounts of whether or not there is a measurement outcome, thus poses no paradox for QBism. Indeed the resolution of Wigner's original thought experiment was central to the development of QBist thinking. The focus of this paper concerns two very instructive mod…
In his recent paper "QBism, FAPP and the Quantum Omelette" [1608.00548v1] de Ronde makes a variety of questionable claims concerning QBism, Bohr, and the present author's critical appraisal of QBism [1409.3312v1]. These claims are examined. Subsequently an outline is presented of what one might see if one looks into the quantum domain through the window provided by the quantum-mechanical correlations between outcome-indicating events in the classical domain.
The subjective Bayesian interpretation of quantum mechanics (QBism) and Rovelli's relational interpretation of quantum mechanics (RQM) are both notable for embracing the radical idea that measurement outcomes correspond to events whose occurrence (or not) is relative to an observer. Here we provide a detailed study of their similarities and especially their differences.
QBism is one of the main candidates for an epistemic interpretation of quantum mechanics. According to QBism, the quantum state or the wavefunction represents the subjective degrees of belief of the agent assigning the state. But, although the quantum state is not part of the furniture of the world, quantum mechanics grasps the real via the Born rule which is a consistency condition for the probability assignments of the agent. In this paper, we evaluate the plausibility of recent criticism of QBism . We focus on the consequences of the subjective character of the quantum state, the issue of r…
Bohmian mechanics (BM) is a popular interpretation of quantum mechanics in which particles have real positions. The velocity of a point x in configuration space is defined as the standard probability current j(x) divided by the probability density P(x). However, this ``standard'' j is in fact only one of infinitely many that transform correctly and satisfy \dot P + \del . j=0. In this article I show that there is a unique j that can be determined experimentally as a weak value using techniques that would make sense to a classical physicist. Moreover, this operationally defined j equals the sta…
We give an introduction to the QBist interpretation of quantum mechanics. We note that it removes the paradoxes, conundra, and pseudo-problems that have plagued quantum foundations for the past nine decades. As an example, we show in detail how it eliminates quantum "nonlocality".
Christopher Fuchs and Rüdiger Schack have developed a way of understanding science, which, among other things, resolves many of the conceptual puzzles of quantum mechanics that have vexed people for the past nine decades. They call it QBism. I speculate on how John Bell might have reacted to QBism, and I explain the many ways in which QBism differs importantly from the orthodox ways of thinking about quantum mechanics associated with the term "Copenhagen interpretation."
The interpretation of quantum theory known as QBism argues that many elements of the formalism have a subjective interpretation. At the same time, QBism claims to be a broadly realist program. This implies that reality in QBism must be somehow founded upon an agent's subjective experiences (measurement outcomes). To make this idea more precise, we propose to interpret QBism's "experiences" as synonymous with the concept of "perceived phenomena" in phenomenology. This suggests an approach to ontology in which objects can only be physically real if they are in principle observable. But what does…
Without Niels Bohr, QBism would be nothing. But QBism is not Bohr. This paper attempts to show that, despite a popular misconception, QBism is no minor tweak to Bohr's interpretation of quantum mechanics. It is something quite distinct. Along the way, we lay out three tenets of QBism in some detail: 1) The Born Rule---the foundation of what quantum theory means for QBism---is a normative statement. It is about the decision-making behavior any individual agent should strive for; it is not a descriptive "law of nature" in the usual sense. 2) All probabilities, including all quantum probabilities…
In 1996, N. David Mermin proposed a set of desiderata for an understanding of quantum mechanics, the "Ithaca Interpretation". In 2012, Mermin became a public advocate of QBism, an interpretation due to Christopher Fuchs and Ruediger Schack. Here, we evaluate QBism with respect to the Ithaca Interpretation's six desiderata, in the process also evaluating those desiderata themselves. This analysis reveals a genuine distinction between QBism and the IIQM, but also a natural progression from one to the other.
In this short review I present my personal reflections on QBism. I have no intrinsic sympathy neither to QBism nor to subjective interpretation of probability in general. However, I have been following development of QBism from its very beginning, observing its evolution and success, sometimes with big surprise. Therefore my reflections on QBism can be treated as "external observer" reflections. I hope that my view on this interpretation of quantum mechanics (QM) has some degree of objectivity. It may be useful for researchers who are interested in quantum foundations, but do not belong to the…
In a recent no-go theorem [Bong et al, Nature Physics (2020)], we proved that the predictions of unitary quantum mechanics for an extended Wigner's friend scenario are incompatible with any theory satisfying three metaphysical assumptions, the conjunction of which we call "Local Friendliness": Absoluteness of Observed Events, Locality and No-Superdeterminism. In this paper (based on an invited talk for the QBism jubilee at the 2019 Vaxjo conference) I discuss the implications of this theorem for QBism, as seen from the perspective of experimental metaphysics. I argue that the key distinction b…
QBism is a novel interpretation of quantum mechanics. With its radical emphasis on the subject, QBism provides a welcome corrective to popular misrepresentations of the epistemological reflections of Niels Bohr, while Bohr, rightly understood, can take the edge off QBism's radical subjectivism. Together, they form a winning combination, the key to which is Schrödinger's concept of objectivation, which has its roots in Kant's theory of science. Objectivation contrasts with objectification, the demonstrably futile attempt to make measurements yield outcomes in interpretations that reify a calcul…
Recently I posted a paper entitled "External observer reflections on QBism". As any external observable, I was not able to reflect some features of QBism properly. Therefore comments which I received from one of its creators, C. Fuchs, are very valuable - to understand better the views of QBists. Some of QBism features are very delicate and to extract them from articles of QBists is not a simple task. Therefore I hope that the second portion of my reflection on QBism (or better to say my reflections on Fuchs' reflections on my reflections) might be interesting and useful for other experts in q…
This paper presents a framework for Quantum causal modeling based on the interpretation of causality as a relation between an observer's probability assignments to hypothetical or counterfactual experiments. The framework is based on the principle of `causal sufficiency': that it should be possible to make inferences about interventions using only the probabilities from a single `reference experiment' plus causal structure in the form of a DAG. This leads to several interesting results: we find that quantum measurements deserve a special status distinct from interventions, and that a special r…
In this paper we discuss the so called "quantum omelette" created by Bohr and Heisenberg through the mix of (ontic) objective accounts and (epistemic) subjective ones within the analysis of Quantum Mechanics (QM). We will begin by addressing the difficult relation between ontology and epistemology within the history of both physics and philosophy. We will then argue that the present "quantum omelette" is being presently cooked in two opposite directions: the first scrambling ontological problems with epistemological solutions and the second scrambling epistemic approaches with ontological ques…
In the last five years of his life Itamar Pitowsky developed the idea that the formal structure of quantum theory should be thought of as a Bayesian probability theory adapted to the empirical situation that Nature's events just so happen to conform to a non-Boolean algebra. QBism too takes a Bayesian stance on the probabilities of quantum theory, but its probabilities are the personal degrees of belief a sufficiently-schooled agent holds for the consequences of her actions on the external world. Thus QBism has two levels of the personal where the Pitowskyan view has one. The differences go fu…
In a recent article, Khrennikov claims that a particular theorem about agreement between quantum measurement results poses a problem for the interpretation of quantum mechanics known as QBism. Considering the basic setup of that theorem in light of the meaning that QBism gives to probability shows that the claim is unfounded.
Motivated by Quantum Bayesianism I give background for a general epistemic approach to quantum mechanics, where complementarity and symmetry are the only essential features. A general definition of a symmetric epistemic setting is introduced, and for this setting the basic Hilbert space formalism is arrived at under certain technical assumptions. Other aspects of ordinary quantum mechanics will be developed from the same basis elsewhere.
In the Philosophical Investigations, Ludwig Wittgenstein wrote, " 'I' is not the name of a person, nor 'here' of a place, .... But they are connected with names. ... [And] it is characteristic of physics not to use these words." This statement expresses the dominant way of thinking in physics: Physics is about the impersonal laws of nature; the "I" never makes an appearance in it. Since the advent of quantum theory, however, there has always been a nagging pressure to insert a first-person perspective into the heart of physics. In incarnations of lesser or greater strength, one may consider th…
We discuss foundational issues of quantum information biology (QIB) -- one of the most successful applications of the quantum formalism outside of physics. QIB provides a multi-scale model of information processing in bio-systems: from proteins and cells to cognitive and social systems. This theory has to be sharply distinguished from "traditional quantum biophysics". The latter is about quantum bio-physical processes, e.g., in cells or brains. QIB models the dynamics of information states of bio-systems. It is based on the quantum-like paradigm: complex bio-systems process information in acco…
The relational approach to quantum states asserts that the physical description of quantum systems is always relative to something or someone. In relational quantum mechanics (RQM) it is relative to other quantum systems, in the (neo-)Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory to measurement contexts, and in QBism to the beliefs of the agents. In contrast to the other two interpretations, in RQM any interaction between two quantum systems counts as a "measurement", and the terms "observer" and "observed system" apply to arbitrary systems. We show, in the form of a no-go theorem, that in RQM t…
In the Quantum-Bayesian interpretation of quantum theory (or QBism), the Born Rule cannot be interpreted as a rule for setting measurement-outcome probabilities from an objective quantum state. But if not, what is the role of the rule? In this paper, we argue that it should be seen as an empirical addition to Bayesian reasoning itself. Particularly, we show how to view the Born Rule as a normative rule in addition to usual Dutch-book coherence. It is a rule that takes into account how one should assign probabilities to the consequences of various intended measurements on a physical system, but…
