Quantum Theory and Explanatory Discourse: Endgame for Understanding?

Empirical adequacy, formal explanation and understanding are distinct goals of science. While no a priori criterion for understanding should be laid down, there may be inherent limitations on the way we are able to understand explanations of physical phenomena. I examine several recent contributions to the exercise of fashioning an explanatory discourse to mold the formal explanation provided by quantum mechanics to our modes of understanding. The question is whether we are capable of truly understanding (or comprehending) quantum phenomena, as opposed to simply accepting the formalism and certain irreducible quantum correlations. The central issue is that of understanding versus merely redefining terms to paper over our ignorance.

[1]  Asher Peres,et al.  IS QUANTUM THEORY UNIVERSALLY VALID , 1982 .

[2]  S. Schweber.  Feynman and the visualization of space-time processes , 1986 .

[3]  Law and Explanation: An Essay in the Philosophy of Science , 1971 .

[4]  H. Krips.  The Metaphysics of Quantum Theory , 1988 .

[5]  Abner Shimony.  Search for a worldview which can accommodate our knowledge of microphysics , 1993 .

[6]  M. Friedman.  Explanation and Scientific Understanding , 1974 .

[7]  G. Roger,et al.  Experimental Test of Bell's Inequalities Using Time- Varying Analyzers , 1982 .

[8]  J. Cushing.  CAUSAL QUANTUM THEORY WHY A NONSTARTER , 1992 .

[9]  F. Rohrlich.  Reality and Quantum Mechanics , 1986 .

[10]  Basil J. Hiley,et al.  Non-locality and locality in the stochastic interpretation of quantum mechanics , 1989 .

[11]  E. M.,et al.  Statistical Mechanics , 2021, Manual for Theoretical Chemistry.

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

[13]  James T. Cushing,et al.  Philoophical Consequences of Quantum Theory , 1989 .

[14]  H. Stapp.  Bell’s theorem and the foundations of quantum physics , 1985 .

[15]  R. Kapp.  British Journal for the Philosophy of Science , 1950, Nature.

[16]  J. E. Mcguire,et al.  FORESIGHT AND UNDERSTANDING , 1962 .

[17]  Weber,et al.  Unified dynamics for microscopic and macroscopic systems. , 1986, Physical review. D, Particles and fields.

[18]  On Pragmatic and Scientific Explanation: Comments on Achinstein's and Salmon's Papers , 1984, PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association.

[19]  Arthur Fine,et al.  Unnatural Attitudes: Realist and Instrumentalist Attachments to Science , 1986 .

[20]  J. Woodward,et al.  Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World , 1988 .

[21]  James E. Jarrett,et al.  On the Physical Significance of the Locality Conditions in the Bell Arguments , 1984 .

[22]  G. Warnke,et al.  Understanding and Explanation: A Transcendental-Pragmatic Perspective , 1984 .

[23]  Albert Einstein,et al.  Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? , 1935 .

[24]  A. Zeilinger,et al.  Quantum implications : essays in honour of David Bohm , 1988 .

[25]  Abner Shimony,et al.  Chemistry, Quantum Mechanics and Reductionism: Perspectives in Theoretical Chemistry , 1981 .

[26]  A. Fine.  Antinomies of Entanglement: The Puzzling Case of the Tangled Statistics , 1982 .

[27]  J. Vigier.  Non‐Locality, Causality and Aether in Quantum Mechanics , 1982 .