ePrints

Reply to “Comment on ‘Weak values and the past of a quantum particle' ”

Lookup NU author(s): Dr Jonte HanceORCiD

Downloads

• Published version [.pdf]

Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).

Abstract

We here reply to a recent comment by Vaidman [Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 048001 (2023)] on our paper [Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 023048 (2023)]. In his Comment, Vaidman first admits that he is just defining (assuming) the weak trace gives the presence of a particle—however, in this case, he should use a term other than presence, as this already has a separate, intuitive meaning other than “where a weak trace is.” Despite this admission, Vaidman then goes on to argue for this definition by appeal to ideas around an objectively existing idea of presence. We show these appeals rely on their own conclusion—that there is always a matter of fact about the location of a quantum particle.

Publication metadata

Author(s): Hance JR, Rarity J, Ladyman J

Publication type: Article

Publication status: Published

Journal: Physical Review Research

Year: 2023

Volume: 5

Issue: 4

Online publication date: 08/11/2023

Acceptance date: 19/10/2023

Date deposited: 08/04/2024

ISSN (electronic): 2643-1564

Publisher: American Physical Society

URL: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5.048002

DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5.048002

Altmetrics

Funding

Share