{
  "annotation_id": "04748bd4-c55f-4d66-9fde-9a20d28a8f7d",
  "date_created": "2026-03-02T18:02:23.893000Z",
  "date_modified": "2026-03-02T18:02:23.893000Z",
  "file_hash": "cb8b31f7e37882102841bc9391cbbaa5a67aac0d635525b27b70a4099bb28a71",
  "private": false,
  "record": {
    "abstract": "Stapp claims that, when spatial degrees of freedom are taken into account,\nEverett quantum mechanics is ambiguous due to a \"core basis problem.\" To\nexamine an aspect of this claim I generalize the ideal measurement model to\ninclude translational degrees of freedom for both the measured system and the\nmeasuring apparatus. Analysis of this generalized model using the Everett\ninterpretation in the Heisenberg picture shows that it makes unambiguous\npredictions for the possible results of measurements and their respective\nprobabilities. The presence of translational degrees of freedom for the\nmeasuring apparatus affects the probabilities of measurement outcomes in the\nsame way that a mixed state for the measured system would. Examination of a\nmeasurement scenario involving several observers illustrates the consistency of\nthe model with perceived spatial localization of the measuring apparatus.",
    "arxiv_id": "quant-ph/0511188",
    "authors": [
      "Mark A. Rubin"
    ],
    "categories": [
      "quant-ph"
    ],
    "doi": "10.1007/s10701-006-9062-z",
    "journal_ref": "Found. Phys. 36 (2006) 1115-1159",
    "title": "Spatial Degrees of Freedom in Everett Quantum Mechanics",
    "url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0511188"
  },
  "schema_id": "dorsal/arxiv",
  "source": {
    "execution_id": "d759cd9f-2b37-4fe4-9636-8a3a0eb24af9",
    "id": "arXiv Dataset IDs",
    "type": "Model",
    "variant": "snapshot-2026-03-01",
    "version": "0.1.0"
  },
  "user_id": 1000002
}