I have read an answer here about the probabilistic nature of QM and I am curious about why QM is able to predict only distributions of outcomes of an experiment. To be clearer, is QM’s inability of draw a specific outcome from an experiment due to the “imperfection” of the measuring tools used by scientists or to a genuine indeterminacy/randomness in the world?

| improve this question | | | | |
  • Read up on Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Welcome to Philosophy SE! – christo183 Apr 21 '19 at 16:48
  • On the standard interpretation, QM’s inability to predict specific outcomes is not due to the “imperfection” of measuring tools or their interference with what is measured (as Bohr originally thought). QM predicts as much as can be predicted in principle, the unpredictability is in the nature of things. Even if an alternative deterministic interpretation with hidden variables turns out to be true predictions will not be based on "perfecting" the tools but rather on measuring something else, more fundamental, namely the hidden variables. – Conifold Apr 22 '19 at 5:56

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.