A Defense of the Paraconsistent Approach to Quantum Superpositions (Reply to Arenhart and Krause)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.48160/18532330me9.231Palavras-chave:
quantum superpositions, paraconsistency, measurement problemResumo
In da Costa and de Ronde (2013) we discussed the possibility of considering quantum superpositions in terms of a paraconsistent approach. We argued that, even though most interpretations of quantum mechanics attempt to escape contradictions, there are many reasons that indicate it could be worthwhile to engage in a research of this kind. Recently, Arenhart and Krause (2016) have raised several arguments against this Paraconsistent Approach to Quantum Superpositions (PAQS). In this paper I attempt to answer the main questions and obstacles presented by them. I will argue, firstly, that the obstacles addressed by Arenhart and Krause are based on a specific stance grounded on an actualist metaphysics—which implicitly presupposes classical logic. Secondly, that there are many interpretations that investigate the possibility of developing a different mode of existence to that of actuality for which the PAQS might be regarded as a valuable prospect. Finally, we provide a set of specific answers to the main problems raised by Arenhart and Krause in order to clarify the original perspective introduced by the PAQS.
Referências
Arenhart, J. R. and D. Krause (2016), “Contradiction, Quantum Mechanics, and the Square of Opposition”, Logique et Analyse59: 273-281.
Bernien, H., Hensen, B., Pfaff, W., Koolstra, G., Blok, M. S., Robledo, L., Taminiau, T. H., Markham, M., Twitchen, D. J., Childress, L. and R. Hanson (2013), “Heralded Entanglement Between SolidSstate Qubits Separated by Three Metres”, Nature497: 86-90.
Bohm, D. (1953), “Proof That Probability Density Approaches in Causal Interpretation of the Quantum Theory”, Physical Review89: 458-466.
Bub, J. (1997), Interpreting the Quantum World, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cartwright, N. (1989), Nature’s Capacities and Their Measurements, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Coecke, B., Heunen, C. and A. Kissinger (2013), “Compositional Quantum Logic”, in Coecke, B., Ong L. and P. Panangaden (eds.), Computation, Logic, Games, and Quantum Foundations, Singapore: Springer, pp. 21-36.
Curd, M. and J. A. Cover (1998), Philosophy of Science. The Central Issues, New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
da Costa, N. and C. de Ronde (2013), “The Paraconsistent Logic of Quantum Superpositions”, Foundations of Physics43: 845-858.
da Costa, N. and C. de Ronde (2015), “The Paraconsistent Approach to Quantum Superpositions Reloaded: Formalizing Contradictory Powers in the Potential Realm”, preprint.
de Ronde, C. (2011), The Contextual and Modal Character of Quantum Mechanics: A Formal and Philosophical Analysis in the Foundations of Physics, PhD dissertation, Utrecht: Utrecht University.
de Ronde, C. (2014), “The Problem of Representation and Experience in Quantum Mechanics”, in Aerts, D., Aerts S. and C. de Ronde (eds.), Probing the Meaning of Quantum Mechanics: Physical, Philosophical and Logical Perspectives, Singapore: World Scientific, pp. 91-111.
de Ronde, C. (2015), “Modality, Potentiality and Contradiction in Quantum Mechanics”, in Beziau, J.-Y., Chakraborty, M. and S. Dutta (eds.), New Directions in Paraconsistent Logic, Berlin: Springer, pp. 249-265.
de Ronde, C. (2016a), “Quantum Superpositions and the Representation of Physical Reality Beyond Measurement Outcomes and Mathematical Structures”, submitted (quant-ph/arXiv:1603.06112).
de Ronde, C. (2016b), “Probabilistic Knowledge as Objective Knowledge in Quantum Mechanics: Potential Powers Instead of Actual Properties”, in Aerts, D., de Ronde, C., Freytes, H. and R. Giuntini (eds.), Probing the Meaning and Structure of Quantum Mechanics: Superpositions, Semantics, Dynamics and Identity, Singapore: World Scientific, pp. 141-178.
de Ronde, C. (2017), “Causality and the Modeling of the Measurement Process in Quantum Theory”, Disputatio, forthcoming.
de Ronde, C. (2017), “Immanent Powers versus Causal Powers (Propensities, Latencies and Dispositions) in Quantum Mechanics”, in Aerts, D., Dalla Chiara, M. L., Krause, D. and C. de Ronde (eds.), Probing the Meaning of Quantum Mechanics, Singapore: World Scientific, forthcoming.
de Ronde, C., Freytes, H. and G. Domenech (2014a), “Interpreting theModal Kochen-Specker Theorem: Possibility and Many Worlds in Quantum Mechanics”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics45: 11-18.
de Ronde, C., Freytes, H. and G. Domenech (2014b), “Quantum Mechanics and the Interpretation of the Orthomodular Square of Opposition”, in Béziau, J.-Y. and K. Gan-Krzywoszynska (eds.), New Dimensions of the Square of Opposition, Munich: Philosophia Verlag, pp. 223-242.
de Ronde, C., Freytes, H. and G. Domenech (2014), “Quantum Logic in Historical and Philosophical Perspective”, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, URL=http://www.iep.utm.edu/qu-logic/.
Dickson, W. M. (1998), Quantum Chance and Nonlocality: Probability and Nonlocality in the Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dieks, D. (1989), “Quantum Mechanics Without the Projection Postulate and Its Realistic Interpretation”, Foundations of Physics19: 1397-1423.
Dieks, D. (2010), “Quantum Mechanics, Chance and Modality”, Philosophica83: 117-137.
Dorato, M. and M. Esfeld (2010), “GRW as an Ontology of Dispositions”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics41: 41-49.
Eva, B. (2016), “A Topos Theoretic Framework for Paraconsistent Quantum Theory”, in Aerts, D., de Ronde, C., Freytes, H. and R. Giuntini (eds.), Probing the Meaning of Quantum Mechanics: Superpositions, Dynamics, Semantics and Identity, Singapore: World Scientific, pp. 340-350.
French, S. and D. Krause (2006), Identity in Physics: A Historical, Philosophical and Formal Analysis, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Freytes, H., de Ronde, C. and G. Domenech (2012), “The Square of Opposition in Orthod-Modular Logic”, in Béziau, J.-Y. and D. Jacquette (eds.), Around and Beyond the Square of Opposition: Studies in Universal Logic, Basel: Springer, pp. 193-201.
Fuchs, C. A., Mermin, N. D. and R. Schack (2014), “An Introduction to QBism with An Application to the Locality of Quantum Mechanics”, American Journal of Physics82: 749. (quant-ph/arXiv:1311.5253)
Ghirardi, G. C., Rimini A. and T. Weber (1986), “Unified Dynamics for Microscopic and Macroscopic Systems”, Physical Review D34: 470-491.
Heisenberg, W. (1973), “Development of Concepts in the History of Quantum Theory”, in Mehra, J. (ed.), The Physicist’s Conception of Nature, Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 264-275.
Krause, D. (1992), “On a Quasi-Set Theory”, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic33: 402-411.
Krause, D. and J. Arenhart (2015), “A Logical Account of Superpositions”, in Aerts, D., de Ronde, C., Freytes, H. and R. Giuntini (eds.), Probing the Meaning and Structure of Quantum Mechanics: Superpositions, Semantics, Dynamics and Identity, Singapore: World Scientific, pp. 44-59.
Kochen, S. and E. Specker (1967), “On the Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics”, Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics17: 59-87. (Reprinted in Hooker,C.A. (ed.), The Logico-Algebraic Approach to Quantum Mechanics, vol. I, Dordrecht: Reidel, 1975, pp. 293-328.)
Ma, X., Zotter, S., Kofler, J., Ursin, R., Jennewein, T., Brukner, C. and A. Zeilinger (2012), “Experimental Delayed-Choice Entanglement Swapping”, Nature Physics8: 480-485.
Marmodoro, A. (ed.) (2010), The Metaphysics of Powers: Their Grounding and Their Manifestations, New York: Routledge.
Melamed, Y. (2013), Spinoza’s Metaphysics and Thought, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ourjoumtsev, A., Jeong, H., Tualle-Brouri, R. and P. Grangier (2007), “Generation of Optical ‘Schrödinger Cats’ from Photon Number States”, Nature448: 784-786.
Popper, K. R. (1982), Quantum Theory and the Schism in Physics, New Jersey: Rowman and Littlefield.
Rédei, M. (2012), “Some Historical and Philosophical Aspects of Quantum Probability Theory and its Interpretation”, in Dieks, D., Gonzalez, W. J., Hartmann, S., Stöltzner, M. and M. Weber (eds.), Probabilities, Laws, and Structures, Berlin: Springer, pp. 497-506.
Schrödinger, E. (1935), “Die gegenwärtige Situation in der Quantenmechanik”, DieNaturwissenschaften23: 807-812, 823-828, 844-849. (English version: “The Present Situation in Quantum Mechanics”, in Wheeler, J.A. and W. H. Zurek (eds.), Quantum Theory and Measurement, 1983, Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 152-167.)
Van Fraassen, B. C. (2002), The Empirical Stance, New Haven: Yale University Press.
Verelst, K. and Coecke, B. (1999), “Early Greek Thought and perspectives for the Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics: Preliminaries to an Ontological Approach”, in Aerts, D. (ed.), The Blue Book of Einstein Meets Magritte, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 163-196.
Vermaas, P. E. (1999), A Philosopher’s Understanding of Quantum Mechanics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wallace, D. (2012), The Emergent Multiverse: Quantum Theory according to the Everett Interpretation, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wheeler, J. A. and W. H. Zurek (eds.) (1983), Theory and Measurement, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2020 Metatheoria – Revista de Filosofia e História da CiênciaOs documentos publicados aqui são regidos pelos critérios de licenciamento Creative Commons Argentina.Atribución - No Comercial - Sin Obra Derivada 2.5
