Recovering Quantum Logic Within an Extended Classical Framework

We present a procedure which allows us to recover classical and nonclassical logical structures as concrete logics associated with physical theories expressed by means of classical languages. This procedure consists in choosing, for a given theory $${{\mathcal{T}}}$$ and classical language $${{\fancyscript{L}}}$$ expressing $${{\mathcal{T}}, }$$ an observative sublanguage L of $${{\fancyscript{L}}}$$ with a notion of truth as correspondence, introducing in L a derived and theory-dependent notion of C-truth (true with certainty), defining a physical preorder$$\prec$$ induced by C-truth, and finally selecting a set of sentences ϕV that are verifiable (or testable) according to $${{\mathcal{T}}, }$$ on which a weak complementation⊥ is induced by $${{\mathcal{T}}. }$$ The triple $$(\phi_{V},\prec,^{\perp})$$ is then the desired concrete logic. By applying this procedure we recover a classical logic and a standard quantum logic as concrete logics associated with classical and quantum mechanics, respectively. The latter result is obtained in a purely formal way, but it can be provided with a physical meaning by adopting a recent interpretation of quantum mechanics that reinterprets quantum probabilities as conditional on detection rather than absolute. Hence quantum logic can be considered as a mathematical structure formalizing the properties of the notion of verification in quantum physics. This conclusion supports the general idea that some nonclassical logics can coexist without conflicting with classical logic (global pluralism) because they formalize metalinguistic notions that do not coincide with the notion of truth as correspondence but are not alternative to it either.

[1]  R. Walker,et al.  Philosophy of Logic , 1977 .

[2]  C. Garola,et al.  Embedding Quantum Mechanics Into a Broader Noncontextual Theory: A Conciliatory Result , 2008, 0811.0539.

[3]  C. Garola,et al.  Generalized Observables, Bell’s Inequalities and Mixtures in the ESR Model for QM , 2010, 1001.4688.

[4]  M. Jammer The philosophy of quantum mechanics , 1974 .

[6]  J. Neumann,et al.  The Logic of Quantum Mechanics , 1936 .

[7]  Dirk Aerts,et al.  A possible explanation for the probabilities of quantum mechanics , 1986 .

[8]  Robert W. Spekkens,et al.  Foundations of Quantum Mechanics , 2007 .

[9]  Alfred Tarski Pojęcie prawdy w językach nauk dedukcyjnych , 1933 .

[10]  Christopher R. Hitchcock Introduction: What is the Philosophy of Science , 2004 .

[11]  Miklós Rédei,et al.  Quantum Logic in Algebraic Approach , 1998 .

[12]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The Origin of the Non-Classical Character of the Quantum Probability Model , 1987 .

[13]  R. Mcweeny On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox , 2000 .

[14]  William G. Lycan,et al.  Philosophy of Language: A Contemporary Introduction , 1999 .

[15]  Diederik Aerts The Hidden Measurement Formalism: What Can Be Explained and Where Quantum Paradoxes Remain , 1998 .

[16]  N. Belnap,et al.  Entailment. The Logic of Relevance and Necessity. Volume I , 1978 .

[17]  Diederik Aerts Quantum structures: An attempt to explain the origin of their appearance in nature , 1995 .

[18]  Patrick Lincoln,et al.  Linear logic , 1992, SIGA.

[19]  C. Garola,et al.  The ESR model: A proposal for a noncontextual and local Hilbert space extension of QM , 2009 .

[20]  C. Garola,et al.  Extended representations of observables and states for a noncontextual reinterpretation of QM , 2011, 1107.2271.

[21]  Carlo Dalla Pozza,et al.  A pragmatic interpretation of intuitionistic propositional logic , 1995 .

[22]  A. Ayer An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth , 1941, Nature.

[23]  A. Heyting,et al.  Intuitionism: An introduction , 1956 .

[24]  Sandro Sozzo,et al.  A Semantic Approach to the Completeness Problem in Quantum Mechanics , 2003 .

[25]  C. Piron,et al.  On the Foundations of Quantum Physics , 1976 .

[26]  K. Popper,et al.  Conjectures and Refutations , 1963 .

[27]  Claudio Garola,et al.  The theoretical apparatus of semantic realism: A new language for classical and quantum physics , 1996 .

[28]  J. Bell On the Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics , 1966 .

[29]  A. Shimony,et al.  Bell’s theorem without inequalities , 1990 .

[30]  Vito F. Sinisi,et al.  Entailment: The Logic of Relevance and Necessity , 1996 .

[31]  Hilary Putnam Is Logic Empirical , 1969 .

[32]  R. Montague,et al.  The Semantic Conception of Truth and the Foundations of Semantics , 1996 .

[33]  Diederik Aerts Quantum Mechanics: Structures, Axioms and Paradoxes , 1999 .

[34]  Roberto Giuntini,et al.  Reasoning in quantum theory , 2004 .

[35]  Claudio Garola,et al.  Semantic realism versus EPR-Like paradoxes: The Furry, Bohm-Aharonov, and Bell paradoxes , 1996 .

[36]  N. Mermin Hidden variables and the two theorems of John Bell , 1993, 1802.10119.

[37]  M. Nivat Fiftieth volume of theoretical computer science , 1988 .

[38]  C. Garola Truth versus testability in Quantum Logic , 1992 .

[39]  Locality and Measurements Within the SR Model for an Objective Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics , 2003, quant-ph/0304025.

[40]  E. Beltrametti,et al.  Bericht: On the Logic of Quantum Mechanics , 1973 .