Abstract
If no model based on locally interacting objects fits quantum phenomena, how can knowledge grounded in the quantum theory be objective? According to a common view, the conditions which ensure the reproducibility of experiments and the predictability of results are fulfilled in the quantum world owing to the “appearance” of macroscopic objects through decoherence. Based on the analysis of some recent experiments on quantum entanglement, I will point out the circularity of this argument. More generally, I will suggest that the objective features of scientific knowledge do not need to reflect the structure of an “external world”, and that they can be understood as the outgrowth of a systematic endeavour to organize experience in a way which makes prediction possible.
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.
References
Bacciagaluppi, G. “The role of decoherence in quantum mechanics”. In: E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2005. Available online: http://plato.stanford.edu/ archives/sum2005/entries/qm-decoherence/.
Barrett, J. The Quantum Mechanics of Minds and Worlds. Oxford, Oxford University Press,1999.
Bell, J. S. “On Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox”. Physics, 1, 1964, 195–200. (Reprinted in: Wheeler, J. A. & Zurek, W. H. (eds.), Quantum Theory and Measurement. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 1983, pp. 403–408.
Bell, J. S. “Against ‘measurement’ ”. Physics World, 8, 1990, 33–40.
Bertet, P., Osnaghi, S., Rauschenbeutel, A., Nogues, G., Auffeves, A., Brune, M., Raimond, J. M. & Haroche, S. “A complementarity experiment with an interferometer at the quantum-classical border”. Nature, 411, 2001, 166–170.
Bitbol, M. Mécanique quantique, une introduction philosophique. Paris, Champs Flammarion, 1996.
Bitbol, M. L'aveuglante proximité du réel, anti-réalisme & quasi-réalisme en physique. Paris, Flammarion, 1998a.
Bitbol, M. “Some steps towards a transcendental deduction of quantum mechanics”. Philosophia naturalis, 35, 1998b, 253–280.
Bitbol, M. Physique et philosophie de l'esprit. Paris, Flammarion, 2000a.
Bitbol, M. “Arguments transcendantaux en physique moderne”. La querelle des arguments transcendantaux, Cahiers de philosophie de lÆUniversité de Caen, 35, 2000b, 81–101.
Bohm, D. Causality and Chance in Modern Physics. Londres, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1957.
Bohr, N. “On the notions of causality and complementarity”. Dialectica, 2, 1948, 312–319.
Bouwmeester, D., Ekert, A. K. & Zeilinger, A. (eds.). The Physics of Quantum Information. Berlin, Springer, 2001.
Einstein, A. “Remarques préliminaires sur les concepts fondamentaux”. In: André, G. (ed.), Louis de Broglie: Physicien et Penseur. Paris, Albin Michel, 1953, pp. 4–15.
Einstein, A., Podolsky, B. & Rosen, N. “Can quantum mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?”. Physical Review, 47, 1935, 777–780.
Everett III, H. “Relative state formulation of quantum mechanics”. Reviews of Modern Physics, 29, 1957, 454–462. (Reprinted in: Wheeler, J. A. & Zurek, W. H. (eds.), Quantum Theory and Measurement. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 1983, pp. 315–323.)
Ghirardi, G. C., Rimini, A. & Weber, T. “Unified dynamics for microscopic and macroscopic systems”. Physical Review, D34, 1986, 470–491.
Hughes, R. I. G. Quantum Mechanics, Its Structure and Interpretation. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1989.
Kent, A. “Against many-world interpretation”. International Journal of Modern Physics, A5, 1990, 1745–1762.
Leggett, A. J. “Reflections on the quantum measurement paradox”. In: Hiley, B. J. & Peat, F. D. (eds.), Quantum Implications: Essays in Honour of David Bohm. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1987.
Mittelstaedt, P. “The constitution of objects in Kant's philosophy and in modern physics”. In: Parrini, P. (ed.), Kant and Contemporary Epistemology. Dordrecht, Kluwer, 1994, pp. 115–129.
Murdoch, D. Niels Bohr's Philosophy of Physics. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1987.
Nogues, G., Rauschenbeutel, A., Osnaghi, S., Brune, M., Raimond, J. M. & Haroche, S. “Seeing a single photon without destroying it”. Nature, 400, 1999, 239–242.
Osnaghi, S., Bertet, P., Auffeves, A., Maioli, P., Brune, M., Raimond, J. M. & Haroche, S. “Coherent control of an atom collision in a cavity”. Physical Review Letters, 87, 2001, 037902–037905.
Park, J. L. “The self-contradictory foundations of formalistic quantum measurement theories”. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 8(3), 1973, 211–218.
Pickering, A. Constructing Quarks. A Sociological History of Particle Physics. Chicago, IL, Chicago University Press, 1984.
Raimond, J. M., Brune, M. & Haroche, S. “Manipulating quantum entanglement with atoms and photons in a cavity”. Review of Modern Physics, 73, 2001, 565–582.
Rosenfeld, L. “Foundations of quantum theory and complementarity”. Nature, 190, 1961, 384–388.
Rovelli, C. “Relational quantum mechanics”. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 35, 1996, 1637–1678.
Saunders, S. “Decoherence, relative states and evolutionary adaptation”. Foundations of Physics, 23, 1993, 1553–1585.
Schrödinger, E. “Discussion of probability relations between separated systems”. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 31, 1935a, 555–563.
Schrödinger, E. “Die gegenwärtige Situation in der Quantenmechanik”. Die Naturwissenschaften, 23, 1935b, 807–812, 823–828, 844–849. (Translated into English in: Wheeler, J. A. & Zurek, W. H. (eds.), Quantum Theory and Measurement. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 1983, pp. 152–167.)
Shimony, A. “Bell's Theorem”. In: Zalta, E. N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2005. Available on-line: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2005/entries/bell-theorem.
Vaidman, L. “The many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics”. In: Zalta, E. N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2002. Available online: http://plato.stanford.edu/ archives/sum2002/entries/qm-manyworlds.
van Fraassen, B. C. The Scientific Image. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1980.
van Fraassen, B. C. Quantum Mechanics, an Empiricist View. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1991.
von Neumann, J. Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (1932). Trans. by R. T. Beyer. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 1955.
von Weizsäcker, C. F. The Unity of Nature. Trans. by F. J. Zucker. New York, Farrar-Straus-Giroux, 1980.
Wheeler, J. A. “Assessment of Everett's ‘Relative State’ formulation of quantum theory”. Reviews of Modern Physics, 29, 1957, 463–465. (Reprinted in: Wheeler, J. A. & Zurek, W. H. (eds.), Quantum Theory and Measurement. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 1983, pp. 324–326.)
Wigner, E. “Remarks on the mind-body question”. In: Good, I. J. (ed.), The Scientist Speculates. London, Heinemann, 1961, pp. 284–302. (Reprinted in: Wheeler, J. A. & Zurek, W. H. (eds.), Quantum Theory and Measurement. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 1983, pp. 168–181.)
Zurek, W. H. “Decoherence and the transition from quantum to classical”. Physics Today, 44, 1991, 36–44.
Zurek, W. H. “Decoherence, einselection and the quantum origins of the classical”. Review of Modern Physics, 75, 2004, 715–775.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science + Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Osnaghi, S. (2009). The Entangled Roots of Objective Knowledge. In: Bitbol, M., Kerszberg, P., Petitot, J. (eds) Constituting Objectivity. The Western Ontario Series In Philosophy of Science, vol 74. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9510-8_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9510-8_22
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-9509-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-9510-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)