To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This is a reprinting of Furry’s response to Schrödinger’s cat paper and entanglement papers, as well as Furry’s response to other responses to the EPR paper, especially Bohr’s.
This is a reprinting of Einstein, Podolsky and Tolman’s 1931 letter to the editor of Physical Review. In this letter, the authors demonstrate that the principles of quantum mechanics give rise to an uncertainty in the description of past events which is analogous to the uncertainty quantum mechanics assigns to the prediction of future events.
This is a reprinting of Schrödinger’s famous pair of papers delivered at the Cambridge Philosophical Society in late 1935 and 1936, wherein he first coins the term ‘entanglement’ to describe interacting quantum systems. The first paper (1935) is given here in full; section 4 of the second paper (1936) is reprinted as an appendix.
This is the first ever printing of a short unpublished note by Schrödinger discussing canonical conjugates, which he included among his correspondence in the folder he labelled ‘The Einstein Paradox’. The note references Flint’s response to EPR and contains ideas appearing also in a letter to Einstein in July 1935.
This is a transcription of a typescript Kemble had appended to a letter to Margenau in 1935. In this paragraph, Kemble admits that his initial published response to EPR missed the point of their argument.
In this chapter, we dive deeply into Bohr’s views on (in)completeness and (non)locality. Perhaps the most outspoken and famous respondent to EPR, Bohr is generally thought to be obscure in his reply. We analyse it afresh (at least to our satisfaction), in particular in regard to its argumentative structure, the role of Bohr's examples and that of his 'non-mechanical disturbance'. We also assess its limitations as a reply to Einstein's wider concerns.
This is a reprinting of Ruark’s response to the EPR paper. Ruark puts the EPR debate down to disagreement over the criterion of reality. Ruark states that the majority of physicists will, pace EPR, consider this criterion satisfied even when the elements of a theory correspond only to indirectly measured features of reality.