Coming to terms with decoherence

• Verfasst von: Joos, Erich [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Zeh, Heinz-Dieter [VerfasserIn]
• Titel: Coming to terms with decoherence
• Verf.angabe: Erich Joos (Schenefeld, Germany), H. Dieter Zeh (University of Heidelberg, Germany)
• E-Jahr: 2010
• Jahr: [1 July 2010]
• Umfang: 1 S.
• Fussnoten: Gesehen am 14.09.2023
• Titel Quelle: Enthalten in: Physics today
• Ort Quelle: Woodbury, NY : Inst., 1948
• Jahr Quelle: 2010
• Band/Heft Quelle: 63(2010), 7 vom: Juli, Seite 8
• ISSN Quelle: 1945-0699
• DOI: doi:10.1063/1.3463639
• Datenträger: Online-Ressource
• Sprache: eng
• K10plus-PPN: 185955380X

Abstract

In response to Charles Day’s item on the solution to Hund’s paradox (Physics Today, September 2009, page 16), Robert Harris and Leo Stodolsky write that their work 1 from the early 1980s could not yet refer to decoherence because the term was created more than five years later (Physics Today, February 2010, page 10). However, Day’s formulation that their results—which we used and cited in our 1985 paper 2 when the term decoherence still did not exist—were not yet couched in “the then-nascent decoherence theory” referred not to the name but to the concept. Harris and Stodolsky’s insistence that their terms “quantum damping” and “tunneling friction” are just as appropriate indicates that they adhere to a widespread misunderstanding of the concept of decoherence.