JQIS  Vol.1 No.2 , September 2011
A New Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics
Abstract: The Copenhagen interpretation is the most authorized interpretation of quantum mechanics, but there are a number of ideas that are associated with the Copenhagen interpretation. It is ceratin that this fact is not necessarily desirable. Thus, we propose a new interpretation of measurement theory, which is the linguistic aspect (or, the mathematical generalization) of quantum mechanics. Although this interpretation is superficially similar to a part of so-called Copenhagen interpretation, we show that it has a merit to be applicable to both quantum and classical systems. For example, we say that Bell’s inequality is broken even in classical systems.
Cite this paper: nullS. Ishikawa, "A New Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics," Journal of Quantum Information Science, Vol. 1 No. 2, 2011, pp. 35-42. doi: 10.4236/jqis.2011.12005.

[1]   J. von Neumann, “Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Me-chanics,” Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1932.

[2]   S. Ishikawa, “A Quantum Mechanical Mechanical Approach to Fuzzy Theory,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 90, No. 3, 1997, pp. 277-306. doi:10.1016/S0165-0114(96)00114-5

[3]   S. Ishikawa, “Statistics in Measurements,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 116, No. 2, 2000, pp. 141-154. doi:10.1016/S0165-0114(98)00280-2

[4]   S. Ishikawa, “Mathematical Foundations of Measurement Theory,” Keio University Press Inc., 2006, 335 Pages.

[5]   S. Ishikawa, “A New Formulation of Measurement Theory,” Far East Journal of Dynamical Systems, Vol. 10, No. 1, 2008, pp. 107-117.

[6]   K. Kikuchi, S. Ishikawa, “Psychological tests in measurement theory,” Far East Journal of Theoretical Statis-tics, Vol. 32, No. 1, 2010, pp. 81-99.

[7]   S. Sakai, “C*-Algebras and W*-Algebras,” Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete (Band 60), Springer- Verlag, Berlin, 1971.

[8]   E.B. Davies, “Quantum Theory of Open Systems,” Academic Press, Cambridge, 1976.

[9]   A. Kolmogorov, “Foundations of Probability (Translation),” Chelsea Publishing Co., 1950.

[10]   J.S. Bell, “On the Einstein-Podolosky-Rosen Paradox,” Physics, Vol. 1, 1966, pp. 195-200.

[11]   F. Selleri, “Die Debatte um die Quantentheorie,” Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn Verlagsgesellscvhaft MBH, Braunschweig, 1983.

[12]   S. Ishi-kawa, “Uncertainty Relation in Simultaneous Measurements for Arbitrary Observables,” Reports on Mathematical Physics, Vol. 9, 1991, pp. 257-273. doi:10.1016/0034-4877(91)90046-P

[13]   A. Einstein, B. Podolosky and N. Rosen, “Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?” Physical Review, Vol. 47, No. 10, 1935, pp. 777-780. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.47.777

[14]   N. Bohr, “Can Quan-tum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?” Physical Review, Vol. 48, 1935, pp. 696-702. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.48.696