Abstract
I consider why it has so long been the case historically, and remains largely so today, that local realism, as a constraint or condition on any world view to be deemed satisfying, exercises such a hold on our attempts at explaining and understanding physical phenomena. While I here take as relatively unproblematic the demand of realism (that is, the objective existence of an observer-independent reality), the requirement of locality (here something akin to a first-signal principle for any physical interaction or influence) is much more problematic. The basic question I address is whether the great appeal of locality is based on our inherent patterns of understanding or simply on acclimation through a series of successful explanatory discourses in the history of science. I also discuss the relative importance of (event-by-event) causality and of locality in producing a sense of understanding.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Aerts, D., and Reignier, J. (1991),“On the problem of non-locality in quantummechanics,” Helv. Phys. Acta 64, 527–547.
Bachelard, G. (1934), Le nouvel esprit scientifique (Presses Universitaires de France,Paris); A. Goldhammer (1984) translator, TheNew Scientific Spirit (BeaconPress, Boston).
Bell, J. S.(1964), “On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox,” Physics 1, 195–200.
Bell, J. S. (1966), “On the problemof hidden variables in quantum mechanics,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 38, 447–452.
Ben-Menahem, Y.(1990), “Equivalent descriptions,” Brit. J. Phil.Sei. 41, 261–279.
Bohm, D. (1952),“A Suggested interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of ‘hidden’ variables, I and II,” Phys. Rev. 85,166–193.
Bohm, D., Hiley, B. J., and Kaloyerou, P. N. (1987), “An ontologicalbasisfor the quantum theory,” Phys. Rep. 144,321–375.
Brown, H. (1991),“Nonlocality in quantum mechanics,” The AristotelianSociety, Suppl.Vol. LXV,141–159.
Cushing, J. T. (1991), “Quantumtheory and explanatory discourse: endgame forunderstanding?”, Phil.Sci. 58, 337–358.
Cushing, J. T. andMcMullin, E. eds. (1989), Philosophical Consequencesof Quantum Theory: Reflections on Bell’s Theorem (University ofNotreDame Press, Notre Dame).
de Broglie, L. (1953), TheRevolution in Physics (Noonday Press, New York).
de Broglie, L. (1962), NewPerspectives in Physics, A. J. Pomerans, translator, (Oliver & Boyd,Edinburgh).
de Broglie, L. (1970), “The reinterpretation of wave mechanics,”Found. Phys. 1,5–15.
de Broglie, L. (1973), “The beginnings of wave mechanics,” inPrice etal., pp. 12–18.
Edwards, P.(1967), The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 8 Vols. (Macmillan, New York).
Einstein, A.(1954), Ideas and Opinions (Dell, New York)
Feuer, L. S. (1974), Einstein andthe Generations of Science (Basic Books, New York).
Fine, A. (1982a), “Hiddenvariables, joint probability, and the Bell inequalities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 48,291–295.
Fine, A. (1982b), “Some localmodels for correlation experiments,” Synthese 50, 279–294.
Fine, A. (1982c),“Antinomies of entanglement: The puzzling case of the tangledstatistics,” J. Phil. 79, 733–747.
Fine, A. (1989),“Do Correlations need to be explained?”, in Cushing and McMullin, pp.175–194.
Jarrett, J. P.(1984), “On the physical significance of the locality conditions in the Bellarguments,” Noûs 18, 569–589.
Kamefuchi, S., Ezawa, H., Murayama, Y., Namiki, M.,Nomura, S., Ohnuki,Y., and Yojima, T., eds. (1984), Proceedings of theInternational Symposium on the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (PhysicalSociety of Japan, Tokyo).
Lahti, P.and Mittelstaedt, P., eds. (1985), Symposium on the Foundations ofModern Physics (WorldScientific, Singapore).
Lahti, P. and Mittelstaedt, P., eds. (1987), Symposiumon the Foundations of Modern Physics 1987 (WorldScientific, Singapore).
Lakatos, I. (1970), “Falsification and themethodology of scientific research programs,” inLakatos and Musgrave, pp. 91–196.
Lakatos,I., and Musgrave, A., eds. (1970), Criticism and the Growth ofKnowledge (Cambridge University Press,London).
MacKinnon, E. (1980), “The rise and fall ofSchrödinger’s interpretation,” in Suppes, pp. 1–57.
MacKinnon,E. (1982), Scientific Explanation and Atomic Physics (University ofChicago Press, Chicago).
Maxwell. J. C. (1890), The Scientific Papers of JamesClerk Maxwell, 2 Vols., W. D. Niven, ed. (Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge).
McMullin, E. (1989), “The explanation of distantaction: historical notes,” in Cushing and McMullin, pp. 272–302.
Mehra, J. (1987), “Niels Bohr’s discussions withAlbert Einstein, WernerHeisenberg, and Erwin Schrödinger: the origins ofthe principles ofuncertainty and complementarity,” in Lahti andMittelstaedt, pp.19–64.
Meyerson, E. (1908), Identitéetréalité (Libraries Félix Alcan et Guillaumin Reúnies, Paris).
Meyerson, E. (1936), Essais (Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin., Paris).
Price,W. C., Chissick, S. S. and Ravensdale, T., eds. (1973), WaveMechanics: The First Fifty Years (Butterworths,London).
Quine, W. V.(1960), Word and Object (The MIT Press, Cambridge).
Santos, E. (1991), “Does quantum mechanics violate the Bell inequalities?”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66,1388–1390.
Selleri, F., ed. (1988a), Quantum MechanicsVersus Local Realism (Plenum Press, New York).
Selleri, F.(1988b), “Even local probabilities lead to the paradox,” in Selleri (1988a),pp.149–174.
Selleri, F.(1992), “Einstein-de Broglie Waves and Two-Photon Detection,” in van der Merwe etal., pp. 422–427.
Shimony, A. (1984),“Controllable and uncontrollable non-locality,” in S. Kamefuchi etal., pp.225–230.
Suppes, P., ed.(1980), Studies in the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, Michigan).
Valentini, A.(1991a), “Signal-locality, uncertainty, and the subquantum H-theorem.I,” Phys. Lett. A 156, 5–11.
Valentini, A.(1991b), “Signal-locality, uncertainty, and the subquantum H-theorem.II,” Phys. Lett. A 158, 1–8.
van der Merwe, A., Selleri, F., and Tarozzi, G., eds. (1992), Bell’sTheorem andthe Foundations of Modern Physics (World Scientific, Singapore).
van Fraassen, B.C. (1985), “EPR: When is a correlation not a mystery?”, in Lahti andMittelstaedt, pp.113–128.
van Lunteren, F. H. (1991),“Framing hypotheses: Conceptions of gravity in the 18th and19th Centuries,” unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University ofUtrecht.
Watkins, J. (1984), Science andSkepticism (Princeton University Press, Princeton). Wessels, L. (1979), “Schrödinger’s route to wave mechanics,” Stud.Hist. Phil. Sci. 10,311–340.
Wessels, L. (1980), “The intellectual sources of Schrödinger’s interpretations,”in Suppes, pp.59–76.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1994 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cushing, J.T. (1994). Why Local Realism?. In: van der Merwe, A., Garuccio, A. (eds) Waves and Particles in Light and Matter. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-2550-9_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-2550-9_19
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-6088-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-2550-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive