Speaker: Michael Cuffaro (MCMP) Date: Thu., May 28 Location: Ludwigstr. 31, ground floor, room 021 Time: 12:15 -⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 13:45 Title: How Do Quantum Systems Evolve? Abstract: There are excellent physical reasons for believing that quantum systems evolve `completely positively' through time (i.e. that their dynamical evolution can be described exclusively using CP `maps'). Despite these reasons, there has nevertheless been a long-standing and sometimes passionate debate between physicists over whether some evolutions require that they be described using /not/ completely positive (NCP) maps. In my talk I will attempt to diffuse this debate by arguing that we should side with the minority opinion, but with a qualification: NCP maps should be understood, not as reflecting `not completely positive' evolution, but rather as /partially defined/ CP maps, and that the debate over the properties one should ascribe to the /extension/ of such a partially-defined map is akin to a debate over the properties one should ascribe to a phantom. I close by speculating on some of the implications of incorporating such `NCP' maps into a quantum dynamical framework. *Note: although this talk will be on a specialised topic, every effort will be made to motivate it for and make it accessible to a non-specialist audience.* ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Speaker: Gábor Hofer-Szabó (Hungarian Academy of Sciences) Date: Thu., May 28 Location: Ludwigstr. 31, ground floor, room 021 Time: 16:15 -⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 17:45 Title: On Einstein's Reality Criterion Abstract: In the talk we characterize the different interpretations of QM in an operationalist-frequentist framework and show what entities the different interpretations posit. We define completeness and correctness of an interpretation in terms of how this posited ontology relates to the "real world ontology" posited by principles independent of the interpretations. We argue that the Reality Criterion is just such a principle. We also argue that the EPR argument, making use of the Reality Criterion, is devised to show that certain interpretations of QM are incomplete, whereas Einstein's latter arguments, making no use of the Reality Criterion, are devised to show that the Copenhagen interpretation is simply wrong. Next, investigating the nature of prediction, an essential part of the Reality Criterion, we formulate two hypothesis: (i) the Reality Criterion is a special case of Reichenbach's Common Cause Principle; (ii) it is a special case of Bell's Local Causality Principle.