  Despite quantum theory's remarkable success, many philosophers worry that it
nonetheless lacks some crucial connection between theory and experiment. One
under-discussed aspect of the Quantum Measurement Problems is that it is
sometimes unclear how to model our measurement processes in order to extract
experimental predictions. Without a solution to these pragmatic worries,
quantum theory would be at risk of losing both its evidential support and its
physical salience. Avoiding these risks requires solving the Pragmatic
Measurement Problem. For non-relativistic quantum theory, this problem has been
solved as follows: One can model each of quantum theory's key experimental
successes on a case-by-case in terms of measurement chains and Heisenberg cuts.
From here, one can then strive for a wide-scoping measurement theory capable of
modeling all (or nearly all) possible measurement processes. Indeed, for
non-relativistic quantum theory this leads us to our usual projective
measurement theory.
  But how does this story have to change when we move into the context of
quantum field theory (QFT)? It is well known that in QFT almost all localized
projective measurements violate causality, allowing for faster-than-light
signaling. Despite this, I will argue that we can proceed largely as we did in
the non-relativistic case. We first ought to build up a case-by-case
measurement framework for QFT by using measurement chains and Heisdenberg-like
cuts (where we switch from a QFT model to a non-QFT model). We can then strive
for both a new measurement theory for QFT and an empirically meaningful
characterization of its observables. It is at this point that significantly
more theoretical work is needed. This paper ends by briefly reviewing the state
of the art in the physics literature regarding the modeling of measurement
processes involving quantum fields.
