Abstract
In a previous paper we showed that predictions about the results of repeated measurements coincide in quantum and stochastic mechanics when wave-packet collapse is taken into acocunt. Our result removed some apparent paradoxes pointed out by Grabert, H\"anggi, Talkner, and Nelson. Recently Wang and Liang argued that our analysis was incorrect and they produced an explicit counterexample in order to confute our results. We think that their comment is due to a misunderstanding of our paper. For this reason we discuss here, in more detail, the controversial point of our work, concerning the regularization of the quantum-mechanical propagator. After stating more clearly our point, we show that the criticism of Wang and Liang is supported by an improper treatment of the divergences in their counterexample.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
