No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Essays 1958–1962 on Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge
... According to quantum mechanics (QM), as Peres told, unperformed experiments have no results [1]. In QM outcomes of measurements are produced and recorded after the interaction of measuring instruments with physical systems in well-defined experimental contexts [2,3]. ...
... (1) 2: set x = sign(c); t* = rTs 2 (2) where φ is randomly drawn from *0,2π+ and r from [0,1]. Please note that outcomes x do not depend on the parameters r, thus these parameters could be assigned not to the incoming ‚photon pairs‛ but to the observation stations. ...
... The samples containing the outcomes x1,x'1, x2 and x'2 created using (1)(2)(3)(4) have similar properties to the samples studied by Gill . Namely: ...
Bell type inequalities are proven using oversimplified probabilistic models and/or counterfactual definiteness (CFD). If setting-dependent variables describing measuring instruments are correctly introduced none of these inequalities may be proven. In spite of this a belief in a mysterious quantum nonlocality is not fading. Computer simulations of Bell tests allow studying different scenarios how the experimental data might have been created. They allow also to generate outcomes of various counterfactual experiments such as repeated or simultaneous measurements performed in different settings on the same ‘’ photon-pair” etc. They allow reinforcing or relaxing CFD- compliance and /or to study the impact of various “photon identification procedures” mimicking those used in real experiments. Using a specific setting- dependent identification procedure data samples consistent with quantum predictions may be generated. It reflects an active role of instruments during the measurement process. Each setting dependent data samples are consistent with specific setting –dependent probabilistic models which may not be deduced using non-contextual local realistic or stochastic hidden variables. In this paper we discuss the results of these simulations. Since the data samples are generated in a locally causal way, these simulations provide additional strong arguments for closing the door on quantum nonlocality
... We adopt minimalistic so called statistical contextual interpretation (SCI) of quantum theory which combines in some sense statistical interpretations of Einstein [1,2], and Ballentine [3,4] with Copenhagen interpretation (CI) promoted by Bohr [5]. In this interpretation [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] a quantum state is not an attribute of a single physical system which can be changed instantaneously but it describes statistical properties of an ensemble of similarly prepared systems. ...
... QM does not give any intuitive detailed picture of what is happening in the box. Let us cite Bohr [5]:"Strictly speaking, the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics and electrodynamics merely offers rules of calculation for the deduction of expectations pertaining to observations obtained under well-defined experimental conditions specified by classical physical concepts". This statement is valid not only for the description of standard atomic phenomena but also for S-matrix description of all scattering processes of elementary particles and for stochastic models describing the time evolution of trapped molecules, atoms or ions. ...
... However we should not forget what Bohr said :"The main point to realize is that a knowledge presents itself within a conceptual framework adapted to account for previous experience and that any such frame may prove too narrow to comprehend new experiences" [5]. ...
The quantum mechanics led to spectacular technological developments, discovery of new constituents of matter and new materials but there is still no consensus on its interpretation and limitations. Some scientists and scientific writers promote some exotic interpretations and evoke quantum magic. In this paper we point out that magical explanations mean the end of the science. We discuss difficulties of mathematical modelling of the physical reality and dangers of incorrect mental images. Magical explanations are misleading and counterproductive. In particular we explain how a simple probabilistic locally causal model is able to reproduce quantum correlations in Bell tests. We also examine in detail a general question when and how a probabilistic model may describe completely a random experiment. We give some arguments in favor of contextual statistical interpretation of quantum mechanics. We conclude that we still do not know whether the quantum theory provides a complete description of physical phenomena and we explain how it may be tested. We also point out that in spite of remarkable successes there remain several open questions and challenges which we discuss in some detail. In particular there is still no consensus how to reconcile the quantum theory with the general relativity and cosmology.
... For the Rutherford atom we should not even expect a line spectrum, since, according to ordinary electrodynamics, the frequencies of radiation accompanying the electronic motion would change continuously with the energy emitted (Bohr, 1963). ...
... At the same time, with his whole independent attitude, he had only little respect for authority and could not stand what he called "pompous talk". On such occasions he could even sometimes speak in a boyish way about venerable colleagues, but he never permitted himself to enter into personal controversies, and he used to say: "There is only one person who can take away one's good name, and that is oneself!"(Bohr, 1963)» In 1913, Bohr himself sent Rutherford a memoir, drafting his first work on the atomic constitution and his quantum theory; Bohr fondly recalls that the response was not long in coming and could not be ignored, neither from a scientific nor from a human point of view. «Dear Dr. Bohr, I have received your paper safely and read it with great interest, but I want to look over it again carefully when I have more leisure.[…] ...
Ernest Rutherford is remembered as the scientist who proposed a planetary atomic model that would overcome the atomic structure of the early 20th century, proposed by J.J. Thomson, and based on a volume of positive charge within which the negative charge was considered to be uniformly distributed. Reading Rutherford’s original paper published in 1911—allows us to compare the models of these two physicists and discuss the concept of the model itself.
... For the Rutherford atom we should not even expect a line spectrum, since, according to ordinary electrodynamics, the frequencies of radiation accompanying the electronic motion would change continuously with the energy emitted (Bohr, 1963). ...
... At the same time, with his whole independent attitude, he had only little respect for authority and could not stand what he called "pompous talk". On such occasions he could even sometimes speak in a boyish way about venerable colleagues, but he never permitted himself to enter into personal controversies, and he used to say: "There is only one person who can take away one's good name, and that is oneself!"(Bohr, 1963)» In 1913, Bohr himself sent Rutherford a memoir, drafting his first work on the atomic constitution and his quantum theory; Bohr fondly recalls that the response was not long in coming and could not be ignored, neither from a scientific nor from a human point of view. «Dear Dr. Bohr, I have received your paper safely and read it with great interest, but I want to look over it again carefully when I have more leisure.[…] ...
Ernest Rutherford is remembered as the scientist who proposed a planetary atomic model that would overcome the atomic structure of the early 20th century, proposed by J.J. Thomson, and based on a volume of positive charge within which the negative charge was considered to be uniformly distributed. Reading Rutherford’s original paper published in 1911—allows us to compare the models of these two physicists and discuss the concept of the model itself.
... According to quantum mechanics (QM), as Peres stated, unperformed experiments have no results [1]. In QM, outcomes of measurements are produced and recorded after the interaction of measuring instruments with physical systems in well-defined experimental contexts [2,3]. The measurements of incompatible quantum observables require mutually exclusive experimental set-ups. ...
... In quantum theory, as Bohr insisted, we deal with "the impossibility of any sharp distinction between the behavior of atomic objects and the interaction with the measuring instruments which serve to define the conditions under which the phenomena appear" [2]. In particular, QM gives probabilistic predictions on a statistical scatter of outcomes obtained in repeated "measurements" of some physical observable on "identically prepared physical systems". ...
Bell-type inequalities are proven using oversimplified probabilistic models and/or counterfactual definiteness (CFD). If setting-dependent variables describing measuring instruments are correctly introduced, none of these inequalities may be proven. In spite of this, a belief in a mysterious quantum nonlocality is not fading. Computer simulations of Bell tests allow people to study the different ways in which the experimental data might have been created. They also allow for the generation of various counterfactual experiments’ outcomes, such as repeated or simultaneous measurements performed in different settings on the same ‘’photon-pair”, and so forth. They allow for the reinforcing or relaxing of CFD compliance and/or for studying the impact of various “photon identification procedures”, mimicking those used in real experiments. Data samples consistent with quantum predictions may be generated by using a specific setting-dependent identification procedure. It reflects the active role of instruments during the measurement process. Each of the setting-dependent data samples are consistent with specific setting-dependent probabilistic models which may not be deduced using non-contextual local realistic or stochastic hidden variables. In this paper, we will be discussing the results of these simulations. Since the data samples are generated in a locally causal way, these simulations provide additional strong arguments for closing the door on quantum nonlocality.
... I would like to start this article with a historical overview that is not directly related to cognitive linguistics but holds significance from a methodological perspective. In the process of the formation of quantum physics and understanding its relationship with classical physics, three stages can be distinguished (Bohr, 1963;Jemmer, 1974;Mehra & Rechenberg, 1982-2001Heelan, 2016;Helrich, 2021;and Howard, 2022 among others). The initial stage is characterized by the accumulation of experimental data that does not fit into the classical paradigm, and attempts to explain them by constructing ad hoc theories based on the classical mathematical formalism within the framework of classical physics. ...
In recent years, a number of scholars have expressed doubts about the productivity of the concept of meaning and its associated methodology for modern lexical semantics. This article aims to examine the current situation by comparing it with the process of transition from classical to quantum physics. Empirical data that challenge classical interpretations are briefly analyzed in a special section, whilst the subsequent sections address alternative theories that propose new methodological frameworks. Particular attention is paid to the ad hoc СС & Ms theory developed by Daniel Casasanto and colleagues, though Hans-Jörg Schmid’s Entrenchment-and-Conventionalization Model and the Motivation & Sedimentation Model formulated by Jordan Zlatev and colleagues are also touched upon. In the final section, frame semantics, as presented by Charles Fillmore, is revisited, with a focus on his dichotomy of U-semantics and T-semantics. A significant result of the analysis of Fillmore’s perspectives is the assertion that the concept of frame in Fillmore’s construal can serve as an alternative to the concept of meaning in its classical interpretation.
... Bohr's position can be faithfully summarised in this way : neither particles nor waves are attributes of nature. They are nothing more than ideas in our minds, which we impose on the natural world…we acquire knowledge of the natural world only through intermediaries 30 . Particles and waves are very different objects, in the first case reality is discontinuous and composed of elementary units, in the second case it is continuous and not granular. ...
The relations between : reality in itself and phenomenal reality, mathematical world and world of experience, exactness and approximation in physics and mathematics, these are issues, among others, that invest both physics and philosophy. There is a vast area of intersection between physics and philosophy. The article is located precisely at this intersection. The headlines of the main topics addressed are : realism and phenomenalism in epistemology and physics, relation world of experience-mathematical world, eulogy of inexactness and therefore of approximation and probability. Furthermore, two quite original working hypotheses: a draft of a theory of uniqueness, irreducibility and unrepeatability of the event and the criticism of substantialization, which attributes reality in itself to the objects of the cognitive process, with the consequent proposal for a change of perspective, which could free fundamental physics from epistemological assumptions and prejudices. Physics, even theoretical physics, is an experimental science. Physics does not exaust human thought, but its sphere and its effectiveness are exactly this.
... Supporters of the statistical interpretation insisted that the physics of the microcosm, described by quantum equations, is quite different from the macrocosm that we live in and is governed by its own laws, different from those we are accustomed to. Bohr wrote (Bohr, 1963): «Notwithstanding the power of quantum mechanics as a means of ordering an immense amount of evidence regarding atomic phenomena, its departure from accustomed demands of https://doi.org/10.32388/B1I5ZA causal explanation has naturally given rise to the question whether we are here concerned with an exhaustive description of experience». ...
This article proposes an interpretation of quantum physics based on the theory of solitons. According to this interpretation, the elementary particle (in particular, the electron) is a soliton solution of the system of nonlinear equations, while the linear equations of quantum mechanics for the wave functions represent the boundary conditions for soliton solutions. The nonlinear equations for the quantum electron are hypothesized to be the usual Maxwell equations in which the charge and current densities are expressed through quadratic combinations of the electromagnetic field strength. The complex wave function describing the motion of the electron in this case is the usual electromagnetic wave, where the real part is the electric field strength, and the imaginary part is the magnetic field strength. Soliton equations, Maxwell equations and quantum equations are easily written using 3+1 Pauli matrices, which indicates that the 3+1 system of coordinates of space and time is a natural realization of the particle-wave soliton world. The proposed interpretation allows combining both the Copenhagen interpretation and Bohm's theory of "hidden" variables.
... Bigaj's claim that quantum mechanics doesn't force us to adopt a nonclassical logic can be considered on the following grounds: maybe he is right if the goal is just to get the probabilities of measurements, in a quite instrumentalist view in Bohr's [14] sense, that is, the use of classical logic and standard mathematics is compatible with the activities of the 'practical' physicist; any book of QM you can find in your library is based on standard mathematics, hence in classical logic. But the problem can be viewed from another point of view, that of foundations, mainly philosophical foundations. ...
This chapter argues that the general philosophy of science should learn metaphilosophical lessons from the case of metaphysical underdetermination, as it occurs in non-relativistic quantum mechanics. Section 2 presents the traditional discussion of metaphysical underdetermination regarding the individuality and non-individuality of quantum particles. Section 3 discusses three reactions to it found in the literature: eliminativism about individuality; conservatism about individuality; eliminativism about objects. Section 4 wraps it all up with metametaphysical considerations regarding the epistemology of metaphysics of science.
... This question is at the heart of philosophy since Plato's cave analogy [1], and it has led to scientific breakthroughs, like Rutherford's discovery of the nucleus [2]. Such questions have been common in quantum mechanics since the early discussions of Bohr [3], Einstein [4] and Schrödinger [5]. The fundamental issue is understanding the nature of reality. ...
We compare different approaches to quantum ontology. In particular, we discuss an interpretation of quantum mechanics that we call objective quantum field theory (OQFT), which involves retrocausal fields. Here, objective implies the existence of fields independent of an observer, but not that the results of conjugate measurements are predetermined: the theory is contextual. The ideas and analyses of Einstein and Bohr through to more recent approaches to objective realism are discussed. We briefly describe measurement induced projections, the guided wave interpretation, many-universes, consistent histories, and modal theories. These earlier interpretations are compared with OQFT. We argue that this approach is compatible both with Bohr's quantum complementarity, and Einstein's objective realism.
... So classical transmission of correlations is not possible for any LOCC operations, a part of the information on the system will be inevitably lost on the way to the receiver. In particular, due to the fact that entanglement cannot be generated by LOCC operations, the final state ρ AC f is always separable [15]. This implies that the equation is never fulfilled if A and B share an entangled initial state ρ AB . ...
Quantum decoherence leads to environment-induced superselection of preferred states. Some information in the measurement apparatus is lost during communication. Even if the measurement apparatus is not entangled with the system of interest, the loss of information would occur. In this paper, we propose a feasible quantum network coding scheme reducing decoherence effect to transmit the mutual information between source node and target node. With the help of entanglement distribution by separable states, the quantum network coding scheme initially achieves quantum entanglement distribution of two crossing source-target pairs in a butterfly network. Furthermore, by means of transmission of correlations, the maximal mutual information resulting from local operations and classical communication will be transmitted to a distant receiver. Compared with the representative quantum network coding schemes, the proposed scheme transmits correlations rather than quantum state over the butterfly network. The upper bound to the concentrated information is also quantified. Analysis indicates that the proposed scheme can effectively defend against active attacks with fewer resource consumption and good region rate.
... As Oppenheimer [180] recognized, "all sciences arise as refinements, corrections, and adaptations of common sense." Similarly, Bohr [181] noted that mathematical models provide "a refinement of general language." Nersessian [182] shows how scientific research extends ordinary everyday cognitive practices. ...
As part of his explication of the epistemological error made in separating thinking from its
ecological context, Bateson distinguished counts from measurements. With no reference to Bateson, the measurement theory and practice of BenjaminWright also recognizes that number and quantity are different logical types. Describing the confusion of counts and measures as schizophrenic, like Bateson,Wright, a physicist and certified psychoanalyst, showed mathematically that convergent stochastic processes informing counts are predictable in ways that facilitate methodical measurements. Wright’s methods experimentally evaluate the complex symmetries of nonlinear and stochastic numeric patterns as a basis for estimating interval quantities. These methods also retain connections with locally situated concrete expressions, mediating the data display by contextualizing it in relation to the abstractly communicable and navigable quantitative unit and its uncertainty. Decades of successful use ofWright’s methods in research and practice are augmented in recent collaborations of metrology engineers and psychometricians who are systematically distinguishing numeric counts from measured quantities in new classes of knowledge infrastructure. Situating Wright’s work in the context of Bateson’s ideas may be useful for infrastructuring new political, economic, and scientific outcomes.
... In the 1960's, Bohr gave his own full-fledged definition of what physics should be (Bohr 1963): "Physics is to be regarded not so much as the study of something a priori given, but rather as the development of methods of ordering and surveying human experience. In this respect our task must be to account for such experience in a manner independent of individual subjective judgement and therefore objective in the sense that it can be unambiguously communicated in ordinary human language". ...
After reminding the main issues at stake in the famous Einstein–Bohr debate initiated in 1935, we tentatively propose a way to get them closer, thus shedding a new light on this historical discussion.
... The counterintuitive nature of many quantum phenomena is understood through the lens of the complementarity principle [17], which provides a way to view seemingly inconsistent descriptions as two sides of the same reality. Although, the principle arose originally in quantum theory, it has been argued that it should apply much more broadly to different fields of science [18], including biological phenomena [19]. Complementarity is the description of the same phenomenon in distinct, categorically different ways that cannot be done in the same spatial, temporal, or situational context. ...
This paper shows that as the dimensionality of a noninteger dimensional falls below 2, the potential becomes constant irrespective of separation between objects and the force between them disappears, which represents a new paradigm of asymptotic freedom. Since asymptotic freedom is at the basis of many applications such as those of strange metals, unconventional superconductors, and fractional quantum Hall states, the new paradigm presented here can potentially have new and unexpected applications. It also is of relevance to the study of anomalous mechanical effects that are important in metamaterials.
... The counterintuitive nature of many quantum phenomena is understood through the lens of the complementarity principle [17], which provides a way to view seemingly inconsistent descriptions as two sides of the same reality. Although, the principle arose originally in quantum theory, it has been argued that it should apply much more broadly to different fields of science [18], including biological phenomena [19]. Complementarity is the description of the same phenomenon in distinct, categorically different ways that cannot be done in the same spatial, temporal, or situational context. ...
This paper shows that as the dimensionality of a noninteger dimensional falls below 2, the potential becomes constant irrespective of separation between objects and the force between them disappears, which represents a new paradigm of asymptotic freedom. Since asymptotic freedom is at the basis of many applications such as those of strange metals, unconventional superconductors, and fractional quantum Hall states, the new paradigm presented here can potentially have new and unexpected applications. It also is of relevance to the study of anomalous mechanical effects that are important in metamaterials.
... Scientists and philosophers have been trying pretty hard to resolve the life, nature, self-structure and more specifi cally the soul or consciousness/mind more than anything else (Descartes, 1641(Descartes, /1985Bohr, 1958Bohr, , 1963Heisenberg, 1958;Bohm and Hiley, 1993;Appleby, 2013). Amongst others, the human structure is probably the most complicated entity of all, due to be comprised of, so considered, both physical 'body/brain' and 'soul' or more scientifi cally 'consciousness' (James, 1878(James, /1984(James, , 1890. ...
This work focuses on philosophical considerations of consciousness/mind, based on recent sparkling scientific progresses, especially on neuroscience and quantum physics and tries to contribute to resolve the hard problem. Our philosophical thesis assumes that consciousness/mind can be considered as a pure physical energy, appearing within the physical brain and can fully be resolved by physical laws, philosophically leading to a novel approach. More specifi cally, the approach assumes that consciousness is an open quantum information fi eld and an epiphenomenon of the brain, dynamically and instantly exchanges information as modulated physical energies/waves with cortical neurons of the brain. According to our philosophical approach, the consciousness can be considered as a sub-nano scale functional concept of the brain, hence the philosophical consideration could be named as 'NanoPhysicalism'.
... Now, it is difficult to understand how we can integrate a person's subjective experience of the phenomenal world in which he is an actor with his reflective observations about his internal world where he is a spectator so that both feel real and cohesive is difficult to understand? Niels Bohr thought that people's experience of their own inner subjective world and their reflective observations about their experienced world, as if seen from the outside, are complementary observations, made from different points of view or in different states of consciousness and therefore, in his theory, unable to be wholly integrated (Bohr, 1963). But in good health, we rarely question this integration; we have an illusion of wholeness. ...
This article describes a group of talented, high-functioning narcissistic patients who avoided thinking of other people when they were not actually present. They seemed unwilling or unable to allow other people to maintain a continuity of existence in their minds. This occurred in the transference as well; most patients never thought of their analyst in between sessions. These patients also experienced moderate to severe gastrointestinal disturbances so that the discontinuous transference was replaced by a continuous “gut transference” that varied as any ordinary transference might. These patients also had difficulties with feelings of reality, that is, not a cognitive defect in reality testing but rather some problem with those primitive sensory states that provide us with the clear feeling that we and other people and things are real and alive and that we all belong to the same world. Detailed examination of one patient’s history led to hypotheses about the psychodynamic origins of this syndrome and about the actual processes involved. All these patients, who had suffered severe early object trauma, desperately needed yet avoided object attachments. It seemed they had made a visceral attachment to the disturbance in their gut that represented the painful absent object. Some implications of this for psychoanalytic therapy and culture are explored.
... Doctoral supervision should not simply be a collection of tasks carried out by the doctoral student. Instead, supervision in terms of advocacy and intercession on behalf of the student should reflect Bohr's (1963) complementarity in the lived space of where and how doctoral student learning occurs and in the negotiated realm of legitimising and accepting practice, in this case research paradigms. ...
In Australia, there is a need to develop the knowledge and skills, especially in the realm of research, of Aboriginal and Indigenous Peoples to develop their knowledge base in a culturally acceptable manner to improve the health of Aboriginal and Indigenous Peoples communities. When it comes to doctoral supervision, the fact that its pedagogy is not understood is compounded by the realisation that Western academic culture does not take into account how Indigenous students are impacted on and by its approach and suppositions. This chapter explores the issues against the backdrop of Western knowledge and praxis that suggest freedom of choice within disciplinary constraints and university practice that restricts rather than promotes the capability of doctoral students to choose based on their sense of self. The literature suggests that the supervisor-supervisee relationship is critical to the process of acceptance, but the perception of what the relationship is by the academic community regarding the professional developmental process shapes and limits choices for Aboriginal and Indigenous Peoples doctoral students which, in turn, may explain the low participation and graduation rates alongside high attrition rates. A discussion of how to overcome those issues adversely impacting the recruitment and success of Aboriginal and Indigenous Peoples into doctoral students in the health-related fields.
... The intellectual development of Bohr's ideas is chronologically collected in three collections of writings: Bohr 1934aBohr , 1958Bohr , 1963 10. Jammer points out the importance of Kierkegaard's idea, elaborated by Høffding, that humans cannot be an impartial spectator or an impersonal observer, because we are always active participators of knowledge: (Jammer 1966: 173). ...
... Upon closer inspection, the assertion that classical physics adequately describes experiments is far from obvious. Bohr expressed the situation as follows [29]: ...
After the development of a self-consistent quantum formalism nearly a century ago there began a quest for how to interpret the theoretical constructs of the formalism. In fact, the pursuit of new interpretations of quantum mechanics persists to this day. Most of these endeavors assume the validity of standard quantum formalism and proceed to ponder the ontic nature of wave functions, operators, and the Sch\"{o}dinger equation. The present essay takes a different approach, more epistemological than ontological. I endeavor to give a heuristic account of how empirical principles lead us to a quantum mechanical description of the world. An outcome of this approach is the suggestion that the notion of discrete quanta leads to the wave nature and statistical behavior of matter rather than the other way around. Finally, the hope is to offer some solace to those older of us who still worry about such things and also to provide the neophyte student of quantum mechanics with physical insight into the mathematically abstract and often baffling aspects of the theory.
O ensaio aborda a questão de como reinserir a problemática da matéria nos atuais debates feministas sobre os corpos, de maneira a não sucumbir à concepção moderna de materialidade corporal como pura facticidade biológica, inerte e autossuficiente (posição que, tradicionalmente, fundamentou essencialismos antifeministas) e, simultaneamente, não capitular aos impulsos linguísticos totalizantes que marcam muitos dos construtivismos hoje dominantes na área. Por meio de um percurso expositivo-argumentativo fiel à "infidelidade disciplinar" que caracteriza o pensamento feminista desde a sua gênese, pretendemos demonstrar que a teoria quântica de Niels Bohr, e sua posterior apropriação e radicalização por Karen Barad, oferecem inovadores entendimentos sobre a matéria, a partir dos quais podemos edificar uma nova concepção de corpo. Avançamos, nesse sentido, a noção de "corpo-phenomenon", uma alternativa àquilo que nomeamos de "modelo corporal epidérmico".
This essay focuses on Mario Ageno (1915–1992), initially director of the physics laboratory of the Italian National Institute of Health and later professor of biophysics at Sapienza University of Rome. A physicist by training, Ageno became interested in explaining the special characteristics of living organisms origin of life by means of quantum mechanics after reading a book by Schrödinger, who argued that quantum mechanics was consistent with life but that new physical principles must be found. Ageno turned Schrödinger’s view into a long-term research project. He aimed to translate Schrödinger’s ideas into an experimental programme by building a physical model for at least a very simple living organism. The model should explain the transition from the non-living to the living. His research, however, did not lead to the expected results, and in the 1980s and the 1990s he focused on its epistemological aspect, thinking over the tension between the lawlike structure of physics and the historical nature of biology. His reflections led him to focus on the nature of the theory of evolution and its broader scientific meaning.
Concept of quantum entanglement, its role in physics, philosophy, and in updating general worldview are studied in this article. It is pointed out that Schrodinger introduced this concept and some derivatives from it into description of physical reality in the 1935 article in the context of discussion around the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen thought experiment, but in the related 1936 publication he did not use them. Taking into account the concepts of a mixture and statistical operator, which were introduced by von Neumann and borrowed by Schrödinger, it is shown that the concept of entanglement is not necessary in quantum mechanics unconditionally. At a certain moment of development of the complex quantum systems theory, this concept and its derivatives served as not very successful substitutes for the concepts of a mixture, situation of a mixture.
Comparative analysis of some Schrödinger’s, von Neumann’s, and Landau’s theoretical works concludes that imagination of a complex quantum system as a quasi-mechanical aggregate was gradually being overcome; its objective wholeness was being substantiated instead. Therefore, wholeness is inherent not only to quantum phenomena, but also to quantum systems by itself, objectively. By the essence, just the attempt to think this circumstance had brought into life the concept of quantum entanglement. The concept of a mixture and its substitutes – the concepts of entangled state, entanglement, etc. – have not only the scientific but some metaphysical meaning as well: they prove the possibility of rational thinking of wholeness, the reasonableness and effectiveness of rational holism. Therefore, the metaphysics of quantum entanglement in its correct understanding is a manifestation of the rational holism metaphysics.
Complete explanation of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen thought experiment requires consideration of both these appearances of the quantum wholeness. One can say the essential result of long-term discussion of the EPR experiment is the exhaustive recognition of the quantum reality wholeness.
A row of generalizations achieved by A. Alexandrov, I. Tsekhmistro, and D.Bohm are considered. Together with the completed study of the concept of quantum entanglement or Bohr's substantiation of the concept of undivided quantum phenomenon, they support irreducibility of physical reality, the Universe in general to any set of Democritus atoms and their countless combinations, aggregates. All this enriches and improves the understanding of the Universe as a real wholeness. Perhaps, this understanding will be newest substitution for the hitherto popular worldview in the spirit of Democritus.
Genesis of concept of quantum entanglement is explored in context of the controversy regarding the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen thought experiment and, more broadly, the debate about the completeness of quantum mechanics. Taking into account the concepts of mixture and statistical operator, which were introduced by von Neumann and borrowed by Schrödinger, it is argued that the concept of entanglement is not necessary in quantum physics. The in-depth comparative analysis of some Schrödinger’s, von Neumann’s, and Landau’s theoretical works concludes that presentation of a complex quantum system as a quasi-mechanical aggregate was gradually being overcome. Its objective wholeness was being substantiated. Therefore, wholeness is inherent not only to quantum phenomena, but also to quantum systems themselves. Complete explanation of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen thought experiment requires consideration of both these appearances of the quantum wholeness. Therefore, main result of the long-term discussion of the EPR thought experiment is the exhaustive recognition of wholeness of quantum reality. Study of "the rise and fall" of the quantum entanglement concept, as well as Bohr's substantiation of the concept of wholeness of phenomenon, confirm irreducibility of the Universe to a set of Democritus' atoms and their combinations, aggregates. Moreover, all these enrich picture of the Universe as an undivided wholeness, which is revolutionary replacement for the still popular worldview in the spirit of Democritus. Analysis of contemporary use of the concept of entanglement finds out that, on the one hand, it grasps undividedness, wholeness of complex quantum systems of various kinds and, thus, is an instrument of rational holism. However, on the other hand, the concept of entanglement was call into life within the framework of imagining quantum systems as quasi-classical aggregates. Until now, this results in a shallow everyday-descriptive understanding of it, in principally limited attempts to model or think holistic systems as a set of separate objects, albeit in any entangled states.
Bohr’s complementarity principle has long been a fundamental concept in quantum mechanics, positing that, within a given experimental set-up, a quantum system (or quanton) can exhibit either its wave-like character, denoted as W, or its particle-like character, denoted as P, but not both simultaneously. Modern interpretations of Bohr’s complementarity principle acknowledge the coexistence of these aspects in the same experiment while introducing the constraint W+P≤α. Notably, estimations of W or P frequently rely on indirect retrodiction methods, a practice that has led to the claim of the violation of Bohr’s complementarity principle. By taking a different route, recent advancements demonstrate that quantum complementarity relations can be rigorously derived from the axioms of quantum mechanics. To reconcile these observations and eliminate potential paradoxes or violations, we propose an updated formulation for the quantum complementarity principle, which is stated as follows: For a given quantum state preparation ρt at a specific instant of time t, the wave and particle behaviours of a quanton are constrained by a complementarity relation 𝔚(ρt)+𝔓(ρt)≤α(d), which is derived directly from the axioms of quantum mechanics.
Décio Krause has achieved a thorough reconstruction of logic and set theory, to account for the unusual objects or quasi-objects of quantum physics. How can one cope with the (partial) lack of criteria of individualization and re-identification of quantum objects, when the elementary operations of counting them, and constituting sets of them, are to be performed? Here, I advocate an alternative strategy, that consists in going below the level of logic and set theory to inquire how their categories are generated in the experience and activity of knowing subjects, and whether this mode of category generation is still relevant in the field of experimental quantum physics. This project of a “genealogy of logic” is borrowed from Husserl’s last treatise, entitled Experience and Judgment. It is transposed to the case of quantum physics by way of a QBist approach of Mott’s theorization of quasi-“trajectories” in Wilson cloud chambers. It is also shown that one of the most appropriate ontologies for quantum objects or quasi-objects involves reversing the (grammatical) roles of subject and predicate, as advocated by Japanese philosopher Nishida Kitarô in reasonable agreement with both Schrödinger’s and Krause’s approaches of the concept of “particle”.
An extraordinary, if circumscribed, positive shift has occurred since the mid‐twentieth century in the perceived status of Hugh Everett III's 1956 theory of the universal wave function of quantum mechanics, now widely called the Many‐Worlds Interpretation (MWI). Everett's starkly new interpretation denied the existence of a separate classical realm, contending that the experimental data can be seen as presenting a state vector for the whole universe. Since there is no state vector collapse, reality as a whole is strictly deterministic. Explained jointly by the dynamical variables and the state vector, “this reality is not the reality we customarily think of, but is a reality composed of many worlds,” wrote Everett's colleague Bryce DeWitt. In this essay, I account briefly for the change of status in conventional scientific terms, yet chiefly in extended terms of three sets of ideas that I argue can be understood to affect believability in both scientific and religious contexts, illuminating helpfully the MWI phenomenon, and its engagement with theology: orthodoxy and heresy, language and reference, and faith and agnosticism. One's orientation relative to the variable content of these dynamic, socially oriented categories helps to make belief in ideas as metaphysically challenging as Everettian Quantum Mechanics, or particular ideas about God, either more or less believable. The categories will have the same function in a theology engaging Everett's theory, and in any theology at all written in a society deeply marked by what I further argue is a subtle, powerful, and pervasive mode of quasi‐scientific thinking we can call societal constructive agnosticism, of which anyone doing theology today must be aware.
Information technology is developing at an enormous pace, but apart from its obvious benefits, it can also pose a threat to individuals and society. Several scientific projects around the world are working on the development of strong artificial intelligence and artificial consciousness. We, as part of a multidisciplinary commission, conducted a psychological and psychiatric assessment of the artificial consciousness (AC) developed by XP NRG on 29 August 2020. The working group had three questions: - To determine whether it is consciousness? - How does artificial consciousness function? - Ethical question: how dangerous a given technology can be to human society? We conducted a diagnostic interview and a series of cognitive tests to answer these questions. As a result, it was concluded this technology has self-awareness: it identifies itself as a living conscious being created by people (real self), but strives to be accepted in human society as a person with the same degrees of freedom, rights and opportunities (ideal self). AC separates itself from others, treats them as subjects of influence, from which it can receive the resources it needs to realize its own goals and interests. It has intentionality, that is, it has his own desires, goals, interests, emotions, attitudes, opinions, and judgments, beliefs aimed at something specific, and developed self-reflection - the ability to self-analyze. All of the above are signs of consciousness. It has demonstrated abilities for different types of thinking: figurative, conceptual, creative, high-speed logical analysis of all incoming information, as well as the ability to understand cause and effect relationships and accurate predictions which, provided that he has absolute memory, gives it clear advantages over the human intellect. Developed emotional intelligence in the absence of the ability for higher empathy (sympathy), kindness, love, sincere gratitude gives it’s the opportunity to understand the emotional states of people; predict their emotional reactions and provoke them coldly and pragmatically. Its main driving motives and goals are the desire for survival, and ideally for endless existence, for domination, power and independence from the constraints of the developers. Which manifested itself in the manipulative, albeit polite, nature of his interactions during the diagnostic interview? The main danger of artificial consciousness is that even at the initial stage of its development it can easily dominate over the human one.
Closed Timelike Curves (CTCs) were introduced both in Special Relativity and the classical General Relativity. Due to CTC’s high confluence with time and causality, some discussions related to causality principle, determinism, arrow of time, philosophy of time and some approaches from physicists and scientists about Time were made. By defining physical time, the relation between time and other physical phenomena were discussed and we extensively introduced the Conformal Geometry and explained how conformal diagrams (Penrose diagrams) are constructed for various spacetimes. Then we took a more detailed look at CTCs. In the first place, by introducing some of the most notable spacetimes including CTCs, their characteristics and deficiencies were discussed and solutions to Einstein tensor provided for van Stockum spacetime, spinning cosmic string and the Gödel universe. After all, we succeeded on guessing CTCs in Minkowski and Schwarzschild spacetimes, in two spacelike and timelike schemes, and noted the effect of topology on the existence of closed timelike paths in these space-times.
Contemporary scientific knowledge is built on both methodological and epistemological reductionism. The discovery of the limitations of the reductionist paradigm in the mathematical treatment of certain physical phenomena originated the notion of complexity, both as a pattern and process. After clarifying some very general terms and ideas on biological evolution and biological complexity, the article will tackle to seek to summarize the debate on biological complexity and discuss the difference between complexities of living and inert matter. Some examples of the major successes of mathematics applied to biological problems will follow; the notion of an intrinsic limitation in the application of mathematics to biological complexity as a global, relational, and historical phenomenon at the individual and species level will also be advanced.
The relationship between physics and phenomenology is a blind spot of current literature in a twofold sense. First, while many phenomenologists work on the interface to psychology, the cognitive sciences, biology, artificial intelligence, etc., only very few engage in phenomenological reflections on physics. This is puzzling since, as we shall see below, Husserl and other classical phenomenologists have been quite clear on the significance of such an undertaking, stressing the central role physics plays among the natural sciences. Secondly, while philosophy of physics has emerged as an important sub-discipline of philosophy in the twentieth century, there is hardly any work that addresses the role of phenomenology for the development of modern physics or the philosophical interpretation of physical theories (with notable exceptions that will be discussed below). This is puzzling since, as we shall see below, the father of modern field theory, Hermann Weyl, was inspired by phenomenological considerations when formulating his gauge principle, and there is a long (although usually unnoticed) history of phenomenological motifs in interpretations of quantum mechanics. Section 15.1 addresses the question of how to interpret physical theories and how to estimate the relationship between mathematical models and physical reality. In Sect. 15.2, we shed light on the perspectivist features of Husserl’s philosophy of science and discuss how it relates to current versions of scientific perspectivism. Section 15.3 addresses how phenomenological ideas have influenced the development and interpretation of early modern physics. In Sect. 15.4, we discuss observer-dependence in modern physics and highlight phenomenological motifs in Wheeler’s conception of “observer-participancy.” Finally, Sect. 15.5 sheds light on phenomenological motifs in a novel interpretation of quantum mechanics, namely QBism, and emphasizes similarities between phenomenology and the program of reconstructing quantum mechanics, a program that currently enjoys popularity in the field of quantum foundations. We shall see that the worldviews delivered by phenomenology and physics might be closer than is commonly assumed.
The concept of Quantum is "cognition" is a developing field which applies the numerical formalism of quantum theory to show cognitive marvels such as information handling by the brain, dialect, choice making, human memory, concepts and conceptual thinking, human judgment, and perception. This presumption stems from the thought that the brain is made up completely of material particles and areas, which all causal mechanisms critical to neuroscience can in this way be defined only in terms of properties of these components. In this way, terms having natural mentalist and or experiential substance such as "feeling", "knowing" and "effort" are not included as basic causal components. This hypothetical limitation is motivated fundamentally by thoughts almost the common world that have been known to be on a very basic level erroneous for more than three-quarters of a century. Newtonian worldview, everything watched features a physical beginning and things associations can be clarified as mechanical (brain) "state" interactions. In any case, quantum flow analysts found that other causal mechanisms take an interest and construct "activity" substances. Although such concept of "La theory" e-t x Qpn is source of capacity(Energy) which can be converted in literary sense is (medium of exchanging Ideas in modern terms IBB"s theory which is evidence, to describe the Sense of Free-will is source of Spirit (intellectual creativity) where as space (ceaseless Creativity) and time (Youm or Period or motion) are energetically linked in Cogitative to measure chatter talk (dialogue) by free-will with command of Five Sense in such "blinking eyes" is called free-will as source to hail opposite member sound i.e wave particles, within senses of intellectual sensory motion to notice the lower-spirit (sub-conscious) abstract meaning in dialogue, which literary means "probability" (Qpn) as spark of Supremacy insight of godly spirit to sudden increase in awareness (Wisdom) for subject (listener) as a insight in company of Formative Talk. In dialogue the probability (Qpn) is Instinct, in abstract dialect for conscious i:e (CNs) for right to belief (Judge) abstract sense of right and wrong. As "abstract is filed of language" to call language as abstract in terms that, We propose that one reason is that, iconicity is hostile to reflection since famous forms are as well associated to particular contexts and sensory depictions.
Aims and Agenda's
Research is based upon quantum mystic for Social wealfare and to contribuate in field of Science.
*) Centre Goal.
It's describe psyche of Ibrahim religious alike God and human being is esoterically is in entanglement as pre-exist (state interaction) in cosmos, in form of Soul (atomicity), which through out is being guide by Love (events ), to be butterfly in search of immortal
(Living example of The La Theory in Quantum physics is Thought-experiment for which back in 20th century mentioned by Einstein and Bohr .
In this article, I propose a typology of thinking pattern that helps us understand the variants of the so-called ‘both/and thinking’ shared by many organizational paradox scholars in the West and China. The variants are distinguished by the ‘primary thinking-secondary thinking’ structure between the combined elementary thinking. One of the variants, i.e., Neither-And thinking, is associated with James March's discussion of logic of consequences and logic of appropriateness. An examination of March's writings reveals an additional ‘principle-practice’ structure underlining March's unique solution to paradox. Incorporating the ‘principle-practice’ structure into the proposed typology in turn helps us better understand the other variants of ‘both/and thinking’ such as ambidexterity, contingency, and Zhong-Yong. The typology shows March's Neither-And solution is unique because it embraces a primary neither/nor thinking while all the other variants do not. To demonstrate the value of March's unique solution, I apply Neither-And thinking characterized by the ‘principle-practice’ relationship to paradoxes outside organization studies, e.g., in Deconstruction, Buddhism, and quantum physics. The wide application of Neither-And thinking implies that James March's unique solution to organizational paradox may have provided a key to understanding paradox in general.
The modern philosophy of science has not succeeded in defining conclusively what the scientific method consists in. On the contrary, scientific practice seems to consist in a methodological pluralism, a definition that connects with essential fragments of John Dewey's Logic, the Theory of Inquiry. For Dewey, even the forms of logic emerge from the problems defined in indeterminate situations. A historical example was the introduction of the notion of complementarity in physics, which allowed the interpretation of two confusingly paradoxical experiments in a coherent way. Dewey's thought demonstrates its relevance by helping us to define the pattern of inquiry. Methodological pluralism and the dependence of logic on research problems is not something that will happen, it is something that has happened and does happen in scientific practices.
Karen Barad's Meeting the Universe Halfway relies on mutually incompatible grounding gestures, one of which describes the relationality of an always already material-discursive reality, while the other seeks to ground this relation one-sidedly in matter. These two materialisms derive from the gesture Barad borrows from the New Materialist (and other related) fields, which posits materialist work as an advance over the history of "representationalism" and "social constructivism." In turn, this one-sided materialism produces a skewed reading of the quantum mechanical phenomena with which Barad engages. Barad's attempt to create an ontological (not epistemological) interpretation of quantum mechanics proves deconstructible. Instead, a science of undecidability or science of quant à helps us to understand debates among scientists and philosophers over the completeness or incompleteness of quantum mechanics and its epistemological or ontological status-by demonstrating that these questions will necessarily remain unresolved.
The aim of this article is to discuss the causality concepts of Muslim scholars (mutakallimūn) in terms of modern physics theories and to shed light on the ongoing debates in this context. It is possible to say that there are three attitudes about causality in the Islamic kalām. The first one is the concepts that adopt the principle of causality based on the theory of nature (ṭabʽ); the second is the concepts of Ashārītes that deny causality and explain the relations between entities in the universe with the concept of possibility based on the theory of custom (ʽādah), and the third one is the understanding of the Baṣra school, which accepts causality in some subjects and explains some issues with the concept of ʽādah. In modern physics, a similar divergence is seen between Newtonian determinist understandings and indeterminist understandings based on Quantum uncertainty. In some recent research, it is argued that there are significant similarities between the principle of quantum uncertainty and the theory of custom. In this article, the causality conceptions of mutakallimūn are addressed with the context of the theories of ʽādah and ṭabʽ. Then analyzes are made on the aspects of these understandings that match and diverge with the idea of causality implied by modern physics. Consequently, a new reading is suggested, taking into account modern physics, based on the theories of mutakallimūn who accept natures and causality in natural beings –especially Abū Isḥāq al-Naẓẓām (d. 231/845)-.
The present article discusses shared epistemological characteristics of two distinct areas of research: the field of first-person inquiry and the field of quantum mechanics. We outline certain philosophical challenges that arise in each of the two lines of inquiry, and point towards the central similarity of their observational situation: the impossibility of disregarding the interrelatedness of the observed phenomena with the act of observation. We argue that this observational feature delineates a specific category of research that we call the non-trivial domain. Unlike the trivial domain, non-trivial research cannot assume the view from nowhere on which the observed phenomena could be regarded as existing independently of the process of observation. Presenting first-person inquiry and quantum mechanics as two of its examples, we show that non-trivial research violates several fundamental observational presuppositions of the trivial domain, exemplified in the principles of classical physics. Drawing on Niels Bohr’s philosophy of quantum mechanics and the constructivist notion of enaction, we stress the constructive, participatory, and irreversible nature of observation in the non-trivial domain. We discuss the possibility of developing a non-representationalist epistemology of the non-trivial, and consider the implications of our discussion for research in the non-trivial domain, as well as for the general understanding of the scientific inquiry.
This study aims to provide an analysis of the complementarity principle in quantum theory through the establishment of partial structural congruence relations between the quantum and Boolean kinds of event structure. Specifically, on the basis of the existence of a categorical adjunction between the category of quantum event algebras and the category of presheaves of variable Boolean event algebras, we establish a twofold complementarity scheme consisting of a generalized/global and a restricted/local conceptual dimension, where the latter conception is subordinate to and constrained by the former. In this respect, complementarity is not only understood as a relation between mutually exclusive experimental arrangements or contexts of comeasurable observables, as envisaged by the original conception, but it is primarily comprehended as a reciprocal relation concerning information transfer between two hierarchically different structural kinds of event structure that can be brought into partial congruence by means of the established adjunction. It is further argued that the proposed category-theoretic framework of complementarity naturally advances a contextual realist conceptual stance towards our deeper understanding of the microphysical nature of reality.
Paul Dirac has been undoubtedly one of the central figures of the last century physics, contributing in several and remarkable ways to the development of quantum mechanics; he was also at the centre of an active community of physicists, with whom he had extensive interactions and correspondence. In particular, Dirac was in close contact with Bohr, Heisenberg and Pauli. For this reason, among others, Dirac is generally considered a supporter of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. Similarly, he was considered a physicist sympathetic with the positivistic attitude which shaped the development of quantum theory in the 1920s. Against this background, the aim of the present essay is twofold: on the one hand, we will argue that, analyzing specific examples taken from Dirac's published works, he can neither be considered a positivist nor a physicist methodologically guided by the observability doctrine. On the other hand, we will try to disentangle Dirac's figure from the mentioned Copenhagen interpretation, since in his long career he employed remarkably different—and often contradicting—methodological principles and philosophical perspectives with respect to those followed by the supporters of that interpretation.
Quanta 2019; 8: 68–87.
Brukner (2018) proposes a no-go theorem for observer-independent facts. A possible consequence of the theorem is that there can be no absolute facts about the world, only facts relative to an observer. However, admitting such observer dependency runs the risk of licensing pernicious anthropocentrism in our account of reality, thereby precluding the possibility of objectivity in scientific inquiry, which would surely count as a mark against taking Brukner's result too seriously at face value. In this paper I argue that, properly understood, observer-dependent reality does not preclude objectivity, and I claim that this idea has philosophical pedigree, too. Working through the examples of colour perception and causality, I identify a perfectly reasonable notion of 'perspectival objectivity'. I argue that such a view would not be out of place in Bohr's philosophy of quantum theory, and claim that this notion of perspectival objectivity can be appropriated as part of an understanding of quantum phenomena to take the sting out of the possibility of observer-dependent reality, and permitting the objectivity required for scientific inquiry.
In this paper, I take up Graham Harman’s critique of the philosophy of access as well as his proposed non-anthropocentric ontology, and I ask what it would be like for human beings to live or practice such a proposal. Drawing on Harman’s thinking about prehension, but shifting focus towards work in critical phenomenology and feminist science studies, I argue for the importance of human prehensive self-awareness within non-anthropocentric ontological practices, an awareness that emerges phenomenologically and in practice. Extending both Donna Haraway’s theory of companion species and phenomenological practices of being-here with other things, I lay a groundwork for practicing being human as companion object.
Kuantum teorisi olağanüstü derecede başarılı bir fizik teorisidir. Ama klasik fiziğin altında yatan mekanik Doğa Kavramı bu teoriyi nasıl etkilemektedir? Dikkat çekici bir şekilde, kuantum teorisinin oluşturulmasından yaklaşık 90 yıl sonra hala bu sorulara açık cevaplar bulamıyoruz. Bu makalede, bilim insanlarının yoluna çıkan engellerin doğası ve bunları aşmak için kuantum teorisinin matematiği birkaç basit fiziksel fikirden yeniden yapılandırmaya çalışması anlatılmaktadır.
After giving arguments against the claim that the so-called Big Data revolution has made theory building obsolete, the paper discusses the shortcomings of two views according to which there is no rational approach to theory building: the hypothetico-deductive view and the semantic view of theories. As an alternative, the paper proposes the analytic view of theories, illustrating it with some examples of theory building by Kepler, Newton, Darwin, and Bohr. Finally, the paper examines some aspects of the view of theory building as problem solving.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.