Reality Without Realism: On the Ontological and Epistemological Architecture of Quantum Mechanics

First, this article considers the nature of quantum reality (the reality responsible for quantum phenomena) and the concept of realism (our ability to represent this reality) in quantum theory, in conjunction with the roles of locality, causality, and probability and statistics there. Second, it offers two interpretations of quantum mechanics, developed by the authors of this article, the second of which is also a different (from quantum mechanics) theory of quantum phenomena. Both of these interpretations are statistical. The first interpretation, by A. Plotnitsky, “the statistical Copenhagen interpretation,” is nonrealist, insofar as the description or even conception of the nature of quantum objects and processes is precluded. The second, by A. Khrennikov, is ultimately realist, because it assumes that the quantum-mechanical level of reality is underlain by a deeper level of reality, described, in a realist fashion, by a model, based in the pre-quantum classical statistical field theory, the predictions of which reproduce those of quantum mechanics. Moreover, because the continuous fields considered in this model are transformed into discrete clicks of detectors, experimental outcomes in this model depend on the context of measurement in accordance with N. Bohr’s interpretation and the statistical Copenhagen interpretation, which coincides with N. Bohr’s interpretation in this regard.

[1]  Albert Einstein,et al.  Physics and reality , 1936 .

[2]  Arkady Plotnitsky,et al.  Niels Bohr and Complementarity: An Introduction , 2012 .

[3]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  Interpretations of Probability , 1999 .

[4]  A. Einstein,et al.  The Evolution of Physics: The Growth of Ideas from the Early Concepts to Relativity and Quanta , 1938 .

[5]  N. David Mermin,et al.  Boojums All The Way Through , 1990 .

[6]  Arkady Plotnitsky,et al.  Epistemology and Probability: Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrödinger, and the Nature of Quantum-Theoretical Thinking , 2009 .

[7]  E. Schrödinger Zur Einsteinschen Gastheorie , 1926 .

[8]  G. Hooft The Cellular Automaton Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. A View on the Quantum Nature of our Universe, Compulsory or Impossible? , 2014 .

[9]  P. Dirac Principles of Quantum Mechanics , 1982 .

[10]  H. Folse The methodological lesson of complementarity: Bohr’s naturalistic epistemology , 2014 .

[11]  Julian Schwinger,et al.  Quantum Mechanics: Symbolism of Atomic Measurements , 2001 .

[12]  James T. Cushing,et al.  Philosophical Consequences of Quantum Theory Reflections on Bell's Theorem , 1989 .

[13]  G. Jaeger,et al.  Indefiniteness and Causation , 2014 .

[14]  B. D. Finetti,et al.  Philosophical Lectures on Probability , 2008 .

[15]  G. D’Ariano Physics as quantum information processing: Quantum fields as quantum automata , 2011, 1110.6725.

[16]  Andrei Khrennikov Quantum probabilities and violation of CHSH-inequality from classical random signals and threshold type properly calibrated detectors , 2011 .

[17]  Gregg Jaeger,et al.  Quantum Objects: Non-Local Correlation, Causality and Objective Indefiniteness in the Quantum World , 2013 .

[18]  I. Hacking,et al.  Representing and Intervening. , 1986 .

[19]  C. Isham,et al.  Spacetime and the Philosophical Challenge of Quantum Gravity , 2001 .

[20]  E. Jaynes Probability theory : the logic of science , 2003 .

[21]  W. Heisenberg The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory , 1930 .

[22]  Ian Hacking,et al.  Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science , 1983 .

[23]  H. De Raedt,et al.  Data analysis of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm laboratory experiments , 2013, Optics & Photonics - Optical Engineering + Applications.

[24]  Graham D. Burchell,et al.  What Is Philosophy , 1996 .

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

[26]  W. Pauli,et al.  Writings on Physics and Philosophy , 2010 .

[27]  A. Khrennikov Detection Model Based on Representation of Quantum Particles by Classical Random Fields: Born’s Rule and Beyond , 2008, 0805.1511.

[28]  Paul Adrien Maurice Dirac,et al.  The physical interpretation of the quantum dynamics , 1927 .

[29]  A. Khrennikov Born's rule from measurements of classical signals by threshold detectors which are properly calibrated , 2011, 1105.4269.

[30]  Tsuyoshi Matsuda,et al.  Demonstration of single‐electron buildup of an interference pattern , 1989 .

[31]  Niels Bohr,et al.  The Causality Problem in Atomic Physics , 1958 .

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

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

[34]  N. Mermin,et al.  Why QBism Is Not the Copenhagen Interpretation and What John Bell Might Have Thought of It , 2014, 1409.2454.

[35]  N. Bohr II - Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete? , 1935 .

[36]  J. Neumann Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics , 1955 .

[37]  R. Morrow,et al.  Foundations of Quantum Mechanics , 1968 .

[38]  Armen E. Allahverdyan,et al.  Understanding quantum measurement from the solution of dynamical models , 2011, 1107.2138.

[39]  N. David Mermin,et al.  An introduction to QBism with an application to the locality of quantum mechanics , 2013, 1311.5253.

[40]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  A pre-quantum classical statistical model with infinite-dimensional phase space , 2005, quant-ph/0505228.

[41]  Arkady Plotnitsky Niels Bohr and Complementarity , 2012 .

[42]  Carlton M. Caves,et al.  Subjective probability and quantum certainty , 2006 .