The Measurement Problem: Decoherence and Convivial Solipsism

TL;DR

This paper explores the quantum measurement problem, analyzing decoherence and proposing a new interpretation called Convivial Solipsism, which emphasizes observer-relative outcomes and offers insights into the EPR paradox.

Contribution

It introduces the Convivial Solipsism interpretation, linking it to existing views and providing a novel perspective on measurement and non-locality in quantum mechanics.

Findings

Decoherence explains classical appearance without collapsing superpositions.

Convivial Solipsism posits observer-relative outcomes, aligning with relational and Bayesian interpretations.

Offers a new approach to resolving the EPR paradox without abandoning realism or locality.

Abstract

The problem of measurement is often considered as an inconsistency inside the quantum formalism. Many attempts to solve (or to dissolve) it have been made since the inception of quantum mechanics. The form of these attempts depends on the philosophical position that their authors endorse. I will review some of them and analyze their relevance. The phenomenon of decoherence is often presented as a solution lying inside the pure quantum formalism and not demanding any particular philosophical assumption. Nevertheless, a widely debated question is to decide between two different interpretations. The first one is to consider that the decoherence process has the effect to actually project a superposed state into one of its classically interpretable component, hence doing the same job as the reduction postulate. For the second one, decoherence is only a way to show why no macroscopic superposed state can be observed, so explaining the classical appearance of the macroscopic world, while the quantum entanglement between the system, the apparatus and the environment never disappears. In this case, explaining why only one single definite outcome is observed remains to do. In this paper, I examine the arguments that have been given for and against both interpretations and defend a new position, the "Convivial Solipsism" , according to which the outcome that is observed is relative to the observer, different but in close parallel to the Everett's interpretation and sharing also some similarities with Rovelli's relational interpretation and quantum bayesianism. I also show how "Convivial Solipsism" can help getting a new standpoint about the EPR paradox providing a way out of the standard dilemma that is having to choose between abandoning either realism or locality.