Processual Thinking in the Ontological and Epistemological context of Quantum Mechanics

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (7) ◽  
pp. 21-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladimir I. Arshinov ◽  
Vladimir G. Budanov
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Physics ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Relativistic Quantum ◽  
Foundations Of Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Natural Environments ◽  
Cultural Codes ◽  
Problems Of Translation ◽  
Different Cultures ◽  
Cognitive Niches

The problem of commensurability/incommensurability of different cultural codes is a key problem of modern civilizational development. This is the problem of the search for communicative unity in the world of cultural and biological diversity, which has to be protected, and the search for the cohesion of different Umwelten, of semiotically-defined artificial and natural environments, of ecological and cognitive niches, taking into account that each of them has their own identity and uniqueness. The purpose of the article is to draw attention to the fact that the question of the so-called incommensurability of different conceptual schemes, paradigms, language consciousnesses is widely discussed not only in cross-cultural studies and philosophical problems of translation but also in connection with the problems of incommensurability (untranslatability) between the language of classical physics and the language of relativistic quantum physics. Attention is drawn to the problem of the incommensurability and correlation of different languages that are used in debates about the foundations of quantum mechanics, its interpretation, comprehension and ontology. Two approaches stand out in this debate. The first approach is based on the language of the formed being, on the language of things localized in time and on the logic of Aristotle. The second approach is based on the language of the becoming, process and nonlocality, on the search for various processual-oriented temporal logics. In this regard, we discuss the processual approach to understanding quantum mechanics, proposed in the philosophical and physical works of D. Bohm. The authors argue that (a) the experience of constructive understanding of the metaproblems of the interpretation of quantum mechanics, (b) the critical reception of the legacy of such philosophers of the process as Peirce, Bergson and Whitehead, (c) the deep reflection on the problems of commensurability/ incommensurability of linguistic consciousnesses of different cultures – will eventually create a common synergetic-interdisciplinary space of cooperation for the solutions of the above-mentioned issues.

scholarly journals ABOUT QUANTUM COMPUTER AND QUANTUM MEDICINE

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 18-24
Author(s):  
M.N. Borisevich ◽  
◽  
V.I. Kozlovsky ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Integrated Circuits ◽  
Quantum Physics ◽  
Quantum Computer ◽  
Foundations Of Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Computers ◽  
Short Report ◽  
Max Planck ◽  
Physical Experiments ◽  
Photo Effect

The foundations of quantum physics have been laid by Max Planck, who suggested that energy couldn’t be absorbed and radiated continuously, but only in separate portions - these portions were called quanta. His ideas were confirmed in numerous physical experiments on the photo effect, the structure of the atom and atomic nucleus, brilliantly performed by Bohr and Rutherford. All this in the aggregate made it possible to eliminate the border between matter and waves, predicted by Louis de Broil. In this way the foundations of quantum mechanics were laid = Heisenberg and Schrödinger did this work. Many manifestations of quantum physics can already be observed in everyday life. These are optical quantum generators, computer CDs, and integrated circuits and lots and lots of this. In recent years, the researchers have drawn their attention to other quantum physics applications related to queries. By their design, this work will be carried out in the future by quantum computers. The article presents a short report on the quantum computer and the prospects for its use in quantum medicine.

Humean Chance in Physics

2019 ◽  
pp. 181-213
Author(s):  
Carl Hoefer
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Statistical Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Physics ◽  
Relativistic Quantum ◽  
Relativistic Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Fundamental Physics ◽  
Do So

Some of the most compelling examples of the existence of truly objective probabilities come from physics, in particular quantum physics and statistical mechanics. So it is crucial to the overall success of HOC that it be compatible with the objective probabilities found in these theories. First, objective probabilities in classical (Boltzmannian) statistical mechanics (SM) are discussed. It is shown that HOC does capture the central probabilistic postulates of SM, and indeed that it may do so in two distinct ways. Second, objective probabilities in standard, non-relativistic quantum mechanics (QM), the context in which the notion that fundamental physics is at bottom chancy first became widely accepted, are discussed. It is shown that HOC is especially apt for capturing the probabilities of QM; other accounts may do equally well (though some clearly do not), but none can do the job better.

Ontological Foundations of Cognition in Quantum Physics

2021 ◽  
pp. 62-68
Author(s):  
Mikhail V. Kletskin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Physics ◽  
Foundations Of Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Physical Sciences ◽  
Interpretations Of Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Future Events ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
Physical Phenomena ◽  
Probabilistic Nature

The aim of the article is to analyze the ontological foundations of quantum mechanics and the relationship of various interpretations of quantum mechanics with the question of truth in scientific knowledge. The theoretical material (various interpretations of quantum mechanics) was analyzed. The research methods were analysis, comparative-historical and institutional approaches. On the basis of the study, it can be concluded that physicists are only able to predict the probabilities of physical phenomena or processes, without any knowledge of the structure of entity in itself. The study helps to complement the theoretical picture of the ontology of quantum mechanics and to get an idea about the development prospects of the methodology of physical sciences. We should not ascribe properties that are unobservable in experience to the entity because science can truly interpret only the representation of entity in itself in experience and the ways of dealing with it, not future events or possible states of the entity. Otherwise, science “slides” down to the level of dialectical (rhetorical) exercises based not on true premises, but on generally accepted or “authoritative” biases, which gives room to extreme forms of relativism and takes natural scientists away from studying nature to inventing empirically unsupported hypotheses. When, in accordance with the Cartesian ontology, the scientist assumes that the entity is as the “subject” observes it (that is, the “reflection” of the entity in consciousness is identified with entity in itself), this assumption leads the scientist to attempts to “scientifically” describe the future events or the possible states of the entity. The criterion for the truth of a scientific theory put forward by Einstein in his dispute with Bohr remains a fundamentally unattainable ideal. Cognition of nature is probabilistically and fundamentally incomplete since a person can consciously comprehend natural phenomena only within the framework of their representation in the existing being. The probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics is due to the impossibility of knowing things as they exist by themselves, that is, as they exist outside of representation in the mind of the observer. This does not mean that physical entities did not exist before their knowledge: they existed potentially, but were not valid for the observer, that is, conscious. Quantum physics is as incomplete as any other physical theory when compared with an unattainable ideal, but this fact does not negate its truth for modern scientists since quantum theory is based on the results of verified experiments.

scholarly journals What is quantum in quantum randomness?

2018 ◽  
Vol 376 (2123) ◽  
pp. 20170322 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Grangier ◽  
A. Auffèves
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Theory ◽  
Quantum Physics ◽  
Foundations Of Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Systems ◽  
Contemporary Society ◽  
Quantum Thermodynamics ◽  
Quantum Randomness ◽  
Classical World ◽  
The Impact

It is often said that quantum and classical randomness are of different nature, the former being ontological and the latter epistemological. However, so far the question of ‘What is quantum in quantum randomness?’, i.e. what is the impact of quantization and discreteness on the nature of randomness, remains to be answered. In a first part, we make explicit the differences between quantum and classical randomness within a recently proposed ontology for quantum mechanics based on contextual objectivity. In this view, quantum randomness is the result of contextuality and quantization. We show that this approach strongly impacts the purposes of quantum theory as well as its areas of application. In particular, it challenges current programmes inspired by classical reductionism, aiming at the emergence of the classical world from a large number of quantum systems. In a second part, we analyse quantum physics and thermodynamics as theories of randomness, unveiling their mutual influences. We finally consider new technological applications of quantum randomness that have opened up in the emerging field of quantum thermodynamics. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue ‘Foundations of quantum mechanics and their impact on contemporary society’.

scholarly journals How Quantum is Quantum Counterfactual Communication?

2021 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonte R. Hance ◽  
James Ladyman ◽  
John Rarity
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Energy Transfer ◽  
Quantum Physics ◽  
Foundations Of Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Wave Particle Duality ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Matter Energy

AbstractQuantum Counterfactual Communication is the recently-proposed idea of using quantum physics to send messages between two parties, without any matter/energy transfer associated with the bits sent. While this has excited massive interest, both for potential ‘unhackable’ communication, and insight into the foundations of quantum mechanics, it has been asked whether this process is essentially quantum, or could be performed classically. We examine counterfactual communication, both classical and quantum, and show that the protocols proposed so far for sending signals that don’t involve matter/energy transfer associated with the bits sent must be quantum, insofar as they require wave-particle duality.

Quantum mechanics

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Kachelriess
Keyword(s):  
Field Theory ◽  
Quantum Field Theory ◽  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Relativistic Quantum ◽  
Transition Amplitude ◽  
External Source ◽  
Quantum Field ◽  
Damping Term ◽  
Relativistic Quantum Theory ◽  
Generating Functional

After a brief review of the operator approach to quantum mechanics, Feynmans path integral, which expresses a transition amplitude as a sum over all paths, is derived. Adding a linear coupling to an external source J and a damping term to the Lagrangian, the ground-state persistence amplitude is obtained. This quantity serves as the generating functional Z[J] for n-point Green functions which are the main target when studying quantum field theory. Then the harmonic oscillator as an example for a one-dimensional quantum field theory is discussed and the reason why a relativistic quantum theory should be based on quantum fields is explained.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document