Quantum Entanglement, Bohmian Mechanics, and Humean Supervenience

David Lewis is a natural target for those who believe that findings in quantum physics threaten the tenability of traditional metaphysical reductionism. Such philosophers point to allegedly holistic entities they take both to be the subjects of some claims of quantum mechanics and to be incompatible with Lewisian metaphysics. According to one popular argument, the non-separability argument from quantum entanglement, any realist interpretation of quantum theory is straightforwardly inconsistent with the reductive conviction that the complete physical state of the world supervenes on the intrinsic properties of and spatio-temporal relations between its point-sized constituents. Here I defend Lewis's metaphysical doctrine, and traditional reductionism more generally, against this alleged threat from quantum holism. After presenting the non-separability argument from entanglement, I show that Bohmian mechanics, an interpretation of quantum mechanics explicitly recognized as a realist one by proponents of the non-separability argument, plausibly rejects a key premise of that argument. Another holistic worry for Humeanism persists, however, the trouble being the apparently holistic character of the Bohmian pilot wave. I present a Humean strategy for addressing the holistic threat from the pilot wave by drawing on resources from the Humean best system account of laws.

[1]  David Lewis,et al.  Extrinsic properties , 1983 .

[2]  J. Gilson The nature of a quantum state , 1986 .

[3]  D. Lewis Philosophical Papers: Volume II , 1987 .

[4]  J. Bell,et al.  Speakable and Unspeakable in Quatum Mechanics , 1988 .

[5]  R. Hughes,et al.  The Structure and Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics , 1989 .

[6]  A. Zeilinger,et al.  Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics , 1989 .

[7]  R. Healey Holism and Nonseparability , 1991 .

[8]  D. Albert Quantum Mechanics and Experience , 1992 .

[9]  D. Dürr,et al.  Quantum equilibrium and the origin of absolute uncertainty , 1992, quant-ph/0308039.

[10]  D. Lewis,et al.  Symposium: Chance and CredenceHumean Supervenience Debugged , 1994 .

[11]  Martin Daumer,et al.  Naive Realism about Operators , 1996 .

[12]  James T. Cushing,et al.  Bohmian mechanics and quantum theory: an appraisal , 1996 .

[13]  D. Albert Elementary Quantum Metaphysics , 1996 .

[14]  David Lewis,et al.  Papers in metaphysics and epistemology: Humean Supervenience debugged , 1999 .

[15]  B. Loewer David Lewis’s Humean Theory of Objective Chance , 2004, Philosophy of Science.

[16]  J. Bell,et al.  Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics: Preface to the first edition , 2004 .

[17]  Tim Maudlin,et al.  The Metaphysics Within Physics , 2007 .

[18]  Jonathan Schaffer,et al.  Monism: The Priority of the Whole , 2010 .

[19]  Sheldon Goldstein,et al.  Reality and the Role of the Wavefunction in Quantum Theory , 2011, 1101.4575.

[20]  D. Albert Wave Function Realism , 2013 .

[21]  Alyssa Ney,et al.  The Wave Function: Essays in the Metaphysics of Quantum Mechanics , 2013 .

[22]  Detlef Dürr,et al.  The Ontology of Bohmian Mechanics , 2014, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[23]  Ned Hall Humean Reductionism about Laws of Nature , 2015 .