Skip to main content
Log in

Complementarity, context dependence, and quantum logic

  • Published:
Foundations of Physics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Quantum-mechanical event descriptions are context-dependent descriptions. The role of quantum (nondistributive) logic is in the partial ordering of contexts rather than in the ordering of quantum-mechanical events. Moreover, the kind of quantum logic displayed by quantum mechanics can be easily inferred from the general notion of contextuality used in ordinary language. The formalizable core of Bohr's notion of complementarity is the type of context dependence discussed in this paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. G. Birkhoff,Lattice Theory, 2nd ed. (Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, Rhode Island, 1948).

    Google Scholar 

  2. G. Birkhoff and J. von Neumann, The logic of quantum mechanics,Ann. Math. 37, 823–843 (1936).

    Google Scholar 

  3. N. Bohr,Atomic Theory and the Description of Nature (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1934).

    Google Scholar 

  4. N. Bohr,Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge (John Wiley, New York, 1958).

    Google Scholar 

  5. M. Bunge (ed.),Quantum Theory and Reality (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1967).

    Google Scholar 

  6. P. Feyerabend, Complementarity,Proc. Aristot. Soc. Suppl. 32, 75–104 (1958).

    Google Scholar 

  7. D. Finkelstein, The logic of quantum physics,Trans. N. Y. Acad. Sci., 2nd Ser., 225, 621–637 (1962–1963).

    Google Scholar 

  8. D. Finkelstein, Matter, space, and logic, inBoston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 5, M. Wartofsky and R. Cohen, eds. (Humanities Press, New York, 1969), pp. 199–215.

    Google Scholar 

  9. P. Heelan,Quantum Mechanics and Objectivity (Nijhoff, The Hague, 1965).

    Google Scholar 

  10. P. Heelan, The role of subjectivity in science,Proc. Amer. Cath. Phil. Assoc., Vol. 43 (Catholic University of America, 1969), pp. 185–194.

  11. P. Heelan, Quantum logic and classical logic: Their respective roles,Synthese 21, 3–33 (1970).

    Google Scholar 

  12. W. Heisenberg, Über quantentheoretische Umdeutung kinematischer und mechanischer Beziehungen,Z. Physik 30, 879–893 (1925).

    Google Scholar 

  13. W. Heisenberg,Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory (Chicago University Press, Chicago, 1930).

    Google Scholar 

  14. J. M. Jauch, Systems of observables in quantum mechanics,Helv. Phys. Acta 33, 711–726 (1960).

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. M. Jauch, The problems of measurement in quantum mechanics,Helv. Phys. Acta 37, 293–316 (1964).

    Google Scholar 

  16. J. M. Jauch,Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Addison-Wesley, New York, 1968).

    Google Scholar 

  17. J. M. Jauch and C. Piron, Can hidden variables be excluded in quantum mechanics?,Helv. Phys. Acta 36, 827–837 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  18. G. Mackey,Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Benjamin, New York, 1963).

    Google Scholar 

  19. H. Margenau,Phil. Sci. 4, 352–356 (1937).

    Google Scholar 

  20. H. Margenau, Advantages and disadvantages of various interpretations of the quantum theory,Physics Today 7 (10), 6–13 (1954).

    Google Scholar 

  21. H. Margenau, Measurements and quantum states,Phil. Sci. 30, 1–16, 138–157 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  22. H. Margenau and J. L. Park,Intern. J. Theoret. Phys. 1 (1968).

  23. H. Margenau and J. L. Park, The logic of noncommutivity of quantum mechanical operators and its empirical consequences: Essay in honor of A. Landé (1970).

  24. P. Mittelstaedt,Philosophische Probleme der modernen Physik, 2nd ed. (Bibliographisches Institut, Mannheim, 1966).

    Google Scholar 

  25. J. von Neumann, Quantum logics (strict- and probability-logics), inCollected Works of J. v. Neumann, Vol. 4, A. H. Taub, ed. (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1961), pp. 195–197.

    Google Scholar 

  26. A. Petersen, The philosophy of Niels Bohr,Bull. Atomic Scientists 19, 8–14 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  27. A. Petersen,Quantum Physics and the Philosophical Tradition (M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1968).

    Google Scholar 

  28. C. Piron,Helv. Phys. Acta 37, 439 (1964).

    Google Scholar 

  29. H. Putnam, Islogic empirical?, inBoston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 5, M. Wartofsky and R. Cohen, eds. (Humanities Press, New York, 1969), pp. 216–241.

    Google Scholar 

  30. V. S. Varadarajan,Geometry of the Quantum Theory (Van Nostrand, Princeton, 1968).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Heelan, P.A. Complementarity, context dependence, and quantum logic. Found Phys 1, 95–110 (1970). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00708721

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00708721

Keywords

Navigation