Identity in Physics
Traditionally, the problem of identity is closely associated with the problem of individuality: What is it that makes something being what it is? Approaches to the problem may be classified into two classes: reductionism and transcendental identity. The first group tries to reduce identity to some qualitative feature of the entities dealt with, while the second either grounds identity on some feature other than qualitative properties or else take it to be primitive. The debate is generally centred on the validity of the Principle of the Identity of Indiscernibles (PII), which states that qualitative indiscernibility amounts to numerical identity. If PII is valid, then reductionism concerning identity is at least viable; if PII is invalid, then reductionism seems less plausible and some form of transcendental identity seems required. It is common to say that objects in classical mechanics are individuals. This fact is exhibited by postulating that physical objects obey Maxwell-Boltzmann statistics; if we have containers A and B to accommodate two objects a and b, there are four equiprobable situations: (1) both objects in A, (2) both in B, (3) a in A and b in B, and finally (4) a in B and b in A. Since situations (3) and (4) differ, there may be something that makes the difference—a transcendental individuality or some quality. In quantum mechanics, assuming that we have two containers A and B to accommodate objects a and b, there are just three equiprobable situations for bosons: (1) both objects in A, (2) both in B, (3) one object in A and one in B. It makes no sense to say that it is a or b that is in A: Switching them makes no difference. For fermions we have only one possibility due to the exclusion principle: (1) one object in A and one in B. Again, switching them makes no difference whatsoever. The dispute in quantum mechanics concerns non-individuality on the one side and individuality (be it reductionism or transcendental individuality) on the other. That distinction was grounded on the fact that quantum particles may be qualitatively indiscernible, and, as the statistics show, permutations are unobservable. The actual debate concerns whether some form of reductionism may survive in quantum mechanics or whether some form of transcendental identity should be adopted on the one hand and whether non-individuality is a viable option. Furthermore, a third option, Ontic Structural Realism (OSR), proposes that we transcend the debate and choose a metaphysics of structures and relations, leaving the controversial topic individuals × non-individuals behind.