The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Consistent Quantum Theory
Abstract
Quantum mechanics is one of the most fundamental yet difficult subjects in physics. Nonrelativistic quantum theory is presented here in a clear and systematic fashion, integrating Born's probabilistic interpretation with Schrödinger dynamics. Basic quantum principles are illustrated with simple examples requiring no mathematics beyond linear algebra and elementary probability theory. The quantum measurement process is consistently analyzed using fundamental quantum principles without referring to measurement. These same principles are used to resolve several of the paradoxes that have long perplexed physicists, including the double slit and Schrödinger's cat. The consistent histories formalism used here was first introduced by the author, and extended by M. Gell-Mann, J. Hartle and R. Omnès. Essential for researchers yet accessible to advanced undergraduate students in physics, chemistry, mathematics, and computer science, this book is supplementary to standard textbooks. It will also be of interest to physicists and philosophers working on the foundations of quantum mechanics.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The CH formalism contains the Born rule as a special case and hence fulfils Assumption (Q). Since it also satisfies (S), it follows from Theorem 1 that it violates (C).”
From Quantum theory cannot consistently describe the use of itself (2018) · cites this paper as [35]
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Models of wave-function collapse, underlying theories, and experimental tests
Bassi, A., Lochan, K., Satin, S., Singh, T. P., & Ulbricht, H. (2013) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.85.471 · Cited by 1,170
Schlosshauer, M. (2019) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2019.10.001 · Cited by 603
Is the Quantum State Real? An Extended Review of ψ-Ontology Theorems
Leifer, M. (2014) · Quanta · doi:10.12743/quanta.v3i1.22 · Cited by 361
Quantum theory cannot consistently describe the use of itself
Frauchiger, D., & Renner, R. (2018) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-018-05739-8 · Cited by 333
Understanding quantum measurement from the solution of dynamical models
ALLAHVERDYAN, A. E., Balian, R., & Nieuwenhuizen, T. M. (2012) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2012.11.001 · Cited by 247
Metadata
- Authors
- Griffiths, R. B.
- Affiliations
- Carnegie Mellon University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Griffiths, Robert B.
- ORCID
- Griffiths, Robert B.
- Venue
- Cambridge University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2001-11-29
- OpenAlex
- W4301255404
- Cited by
- 256
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 0.75
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- International Linear Collider (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Quantum chaos and dynamical systems
- Keywords
- consistent histories, measurement problem, Born rule, Schrödinger equation, double-slit experiment, Schrödinger's cat, quantum paradoxes, quantum foundations
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
