Abstract
Quantum mechanics has basically two types of interpretation; an epistemological and an ontological one (1). The epistemological interpretation holds that the statements of quantum mechanics are related to our knowledge, henceforth the probabilistic character, the uncertainty relations and the reduction of the wave packet talk about the boundaries and incompleteness of our theory. On the other hand, the ontological interpretation says that the predicates of quantum mechanics are predicates about reality uncertainty relations express the joint nonexistence of some physical quantities, quantum jumps show the real discontinuity of certain physical processes, and so on.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
See for example Werner Weisenberg: Physics and Philosophy, 1958, p. 48.
For a deterministic version of this view see e.g.: E. Bitsakis: Physique et Materialisme, Appendix, and for an indeterministic one: K.Popper: Quantum Theory and the Schism in Physics.
About the topic of scientific realism see G. Gutting’s Scientific Realism, in: The Philosophy of Wilfrid Sellars, ed.: J.C. Pitt. 1976, D. Reidel.
A. Aspect, D. Dalibard and G. Roger: Phys.Rev.Lett. 49, 1982, p. 1804.
A. Shimony: Contextual hidden variables theories and Bell’s inequalities. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 35, 1984, p. 25.
As Carl F. V. Weizsacker says: ″Space-time is not the background but a surface aspect of reality.″ Quantum Theory and Space-time, in.: Symposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics: 50 years of the EPR- Gredankenexperiment. 1985 , p. 223.
Sharp and Shanks: Fine’s prism model for quantum correlation statistics. Philosophy of Science 52, 1985, p. 538.
The quantum-logician Peter Mittelstaedt writes: ″Quantum mechanics is compatible with Einstein’s reality principle ... . Quantum mechanics contradicts the strong locality principle, which must be replaced by the weak principle. The weak principle of locality allows for an objectification at a distance and is thus seemingly in contradiction with special relativity. However, it follows that this objectification at a distance cannot be used for the transmission of super-luminal signals, which would violate Einstein causality.″ EPR-paradox, quantum logic and relativity. In: Symposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics: 50 years of the EPR-Gedankenexperiment. World Scientific, 1985, p. 171.
Brent Mundy showed that: ″... contrary to common belief, there is no incompatibility between special relativity and spacelike (faster-than-light) causation.″ Special relativity and quantum measurement. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 37, 1986, p.207.
An argumentation in the same spirit: G. Nerlich: Special relativity is not based on causality. Brit.Journ. for the Phil, of Sci., 33,1982,p.361.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1989 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this paper
Cite this paper
Horváth, J., Zágoni, M. (1989). A Change in Paradigm: A Realistic Copenhagen Interpretation (Realism Without Hidden Variables). In: Bitsakis, E.I., Nicolaides, C.A. (eds) The Concept of Probability. Fundamental Theories of Physics, vol 24. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1175-8_33
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1175-8_33
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-7023-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-1175-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive