Skip to main content

Events and the Ontology of Quantum Mechanics

Topoi volume 34, pages 369–378 (2015)Cite this article

Abstract

In the first part of the paper I argue that an ontology of events is precise, flexible and general enough so as to cover the three main alternative formulations of quantum mechanics as well as theories advocating an antirealistic view of the wave function. Since these formulations advocate a primitive ontology of entities living in four-dimensional spacetime, they are good candidates to connect that quantum image with the manifest image of the world. However, to the extent that some form of realism about the wave function is also necessary, one needs to endorse also the idea that the wave function refers to some kind of power. In the second part, I discuss some difficulties raised by the recent proposal that in Bohmian mechanics this power is holistically possessed by all the particles in the universe.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Notes

  1. See Auyang (1995), Dieks (2002) and Haag (2013) for a similar conclusion based on quantum field theory.

  2. Trying to establish coherence between science and intuitive assumptions about the world forced upon us by our hardwired cognitive makeup points to the ideal of unified science recently defended by Ladyman and Ross (2007).

  3. Here, I will simplify it to adapt it to my purpose.

  4. Primitivists about properties claim that objects are collection of properties, while events are simply exemplifications of properties, while primitivists about objects regard them as the ground for properties and events. Pluralistic views are against these forms of monism.

  5. Also van Bentham’s view (1983), which claims that events are times during which certain statements hold, need time (and space, I add, given relativistic injunctions) as essential ingredients.

  6. Here I should note that I do not defend any of these theories, but I am only exploring their metaphysical commitments.

  7. The first to compare GRW’s collapses to Lucretius’ indeterministic philosophy was van Fraassen’s (see Ghirardi 2005, p. 424).

  8. This is a form of moderate structural realism, since relata exist even while being devoid of an intrinsic essence. As such that are individuated via a structure.

  9. Bohr can be considered a entity realist, since he believes in the mind-independent existence of electrons, protons, atoms and so on. However, he is an antirealist about quantum theory because he denies the reality of the wave function (Faye 1991). The same split realism can be attributed to Rovelli (Dorato 2015).

References

  • Albert DZ (1996) Elementary quantum metaphysics. In: Cushing JT, Fine A, Goldstein S (eds) Bohmian mechanics and quantum theory: an appraisal. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 277–284

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Albert DZ (2013) Wave function realism. In: Ney A, Albert D (eds) The wave function. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 52–57

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Allori V (2013) Primitive ontology and the structure of fundamental physical theories. In: Ney A, Albert D (eds) The wave function. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 58–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Allori V, Goldstein S, Tumulka R, Zanghì N (2008) On the common structure of Bohmian mechanics and the Ghirardi–Rimini–Weber theory. Br J Philos Sci 59:353–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auyang SY (1995) How is quantum field theory possible?. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Bassi A, Ghirardi GC (2003) Dynamical reduction models. Phys Rep 379:257–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell JS (1989) Speakable and unspeakable in quantum mechanics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohr N (1972–2006) Collected works, vol 1–12. Elsevier, Amsterdam

  • Brown H, Elby A, Weingard R (1996) Cause and effect in the pilot-wave interpretation of quantum mechanics. In: Cushing JT et al (eds) Bohmian mechanics and quantum theory: an appraisal. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 309–319

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chisholm R (1971) States of affairs again. Noûs 5:179–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clifton R, Pagonis C (1995) Unremarkable contextualism: Dispositions in the Bohm theory. Found Phys 25(2):281–296

  • Darrigol O (2000) Electrodynamics from Ampére to Einstein. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Dieks D (2002) Events and covariance in the interpretation of quantum field theory. In: Kuhlmann M, Lyre H, Wayne A (eds) Ontological aspects of quantum field theory. World Scientific Publishing, London, pp 215–234

  • Dieks D (2006) Becoming, relativity and locality. In: Dieks D (ed) The ontology of spacetime, vol 1. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 157–176

  • Dorato M (2006) Absolute becoming, relational becoming and the arrow of time. Stud Hist Philos Mod Phys 37:559–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorato M (2007) Dispositions, relational properties and the quantum world. In: Kistler M, Gnassonou B (eds) Dispositions and causal powers. Ashgate, Farnham, pp 249–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorato M (2015) Rovelli’s relational quantum mechanics, monism and quantum becoming. In: Marmodoro A, Yates D, OUP. http://arxiv.org/abs/1309.0132

  • Dorato M, Esfeld M (2010) GRW as an ontology of dispositions. Stud Hist Philos Mod Phys 41(1):41–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dürr D, Goldstein S, Zanghì N (2013) Quantum physics without quantum philosophy. Springer, Heidelberg, p 2013

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Esfeld M, Lazarovici D, Hubert M, Dürr D (2013) The ontology of Bohmian mechanics. Br J Philos Sci 64. http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/9381/, doi:10.1093/bjps/axt019

  • Esfeld M, Lazarovici D, Lam V, Hubert M (2015) The physics and metaphysics of primitive stuff. Br J Philos Sci (forthcoming)

  • Faye J (1991) Niels Bohr: his heritage and legacy. An antirealist view of quantum mechanics. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dordrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ghirardi GC (2005) Sneaking a look at God’s cards: unraveling the mysteries of quantum mechanics. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghirardi GC, Grassi R, Benatti F (1995) Describing the macroscopic world: closing the circle within the dynamical reduction program. Found Phys 25(1):5–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein S, Zanghì N (2013) Reality and the role of the wave function in quantum theory. In: Ney A, Albert D (eds) The wave function. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 96–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Haag R (2013) On the sharpness of localization of individual events in space and time. Found Phys 43:1295–1313. doi:10.1007/s10701-013-9747-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegerfeldt GC (1998) Causality, particle localization and positivity of the energy. In: Irreversibility and causality: semigroups and rigged hilbert spaces. Springer, Berlin, pp 238–245

  • Ladyman J, Ross D, Spurrett D, Collier J (2007) Everything must go. Metaphysics naturalized. Oxford University, Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kim J (1976) Events as property exemplifications. In: Brand M, Walton D (eds) Action theory. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp 159–177

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhlmann M (2014) Quantum Field Theory. In: Zalta EN (ed) The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/quantum-fieldtheory/

  • Kuhn T (1970) The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago University Press, Chicago Second Enlarged Edition

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn T (1977) Concept of cause in the development of physics. In: The essential tension. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ch. 2., pp 21–30

  • Laudisa F, Rovelli C (2013) Relational quantum mechanics. In: Zalta EN (ed) The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2013 Edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2013/entries/qm-relational/

  • Lemmon EJ (1967) Comments on D. Davidson’s, “The logical form of action sentences”. In: Rescher N (ed) The logic of decision and action. Pittsburgh University Press, Pittsburgh, pp 96–103

  • Lewis DK (1986) Events. In: his philosophical papers, vol 2. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 241–269

  • Maudlin T (2010) Can the world be only wave-function? In: Saunders S, Barrett J, Kent A, Wallace D (eds) Many worlds? Everett, quantum theory, and reality. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 121–143

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Maudlin T (2013) The nature of the quantum state. In: Ney A, Albert D (eds) The wave function. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 126–154

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer U (2013) The nature of time. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Monton B (2006) Quantum mechanics and 3-N dimensional space. Philos Sci 75(5):778–789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mumford S (2004) Laws in nature. Routledge, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ney A (2013a) Ontological reduction and the wave function ontology. In: Ney A, Albert D (eds) The wave function. Oxford University Press, New York

  • Ney A (2013b) Ontological reduction and the wave function ontology. In: Albert D, Ney A (eds) The wave function. Oxford University Press, New York

  • Ney A, Albert D (eds) (2013) The wave function. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  • Pashby T (2014) Quantum mechanics for event ontologist. http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/10783/1/PSA_2014_submission.pdf

  • Pylkkänen P, Hiley BJ, Pättiniemi I (2014) Bohm’s approach and individuality. In: Guay A, Pradeu T (eds) Individuals across the sciences, Chapter 12. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Quine WVO (1985) Events and Reification. In: LePore E, McLaughlin BP (eds) Actions and events. Perspectives in the philosophy of Donald Davidson. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 162–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Rovelli C (1996) Relational quantum mechanics. Int J Theor Phys 35:1637

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rovelli, C. (2005). Relational quantum mechanics. In: Quo vadis quantum mechanics? Springer, Berlin, pp 113–120

  • Saunders S, Barrett J, Kent A, Wallace D (eds) (2010) Many worlds? Everett, quantum theory, and reality. Oxford University Press, Oxford 2010

    Google Scholar 

  • Savitt S (2001) A limited defense of passage. Am Philos Q 38:261–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Sellars W (1962) Philosophy and the scientific image of man. In: Colodny R (ed) Frontiers of science and philosophy. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, pp 35–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Strawson PF (1959) Individuals: an essay in descriptive metaphysics. Methuen, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Suppes P (1979) In: Bogdan R (ed) Patrick Suppes. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Tumulka R (2006) A relativistic version of the Ghirardi–Rimini–Weber model. J Stat Phys 125(4):821–840

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace D. (2014), The emergent multiverse, OUP

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, Communication and Media Studies, University of Rome “Roma 3”, Via Ostiense 234, 00146, Rome, Italy

    Mauro Dorato

Authors
  1. Mauro Dorato
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mauro Dorato.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dorato, M. Events and the Ontology of Quantum Mechanics. Topoi 34, 369–378 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-015-9315-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-015-9315-6

Keywords

  • Events
  • Primitive ontologies
  • Holistic powers