Measurements according to Consistent Histories

TL;DR

This paper critically examines the Consistent Histories approach to quantum measurement, arguing that it relies on external assumptions and fails to adequately resolve the measurement problem.

Contribution

The paper provides a critical assessment showing that the Consistent Histories formalism does not internally justify key assumptions about measurement outcomes.

Findings

The approach relies on external assumptions about apparatus states.

It fails to justify the choice of frameworks for measurement scenarios.

The formalism does not satisfactorily resolve the measurement problem.

Abstract

We critically evaluate the treatment of the notion of measurement in the Consistent Histories approach to quantum mechanics. We find such a treatment unsatisfactory because it relies, often implicitly, on elements external to those provided by the formalism. In particular, we note that, in order for the formalism to be informative when dealing with measurement scenarios, one needs to assume that the appropriate choice of framework is such that apparatuses are always in states of well defined pointer positions after measurements. The problem is that there is nothing in the formalism to justify this assumption. We conclude that the Consistent Histories approach, contrary to what is claimed by its proponents, fails to provide a truly satisfactory resolution for the measurement problem in quantum theory.