The legacy of Post-Modernism is renewed attention to the issues of knowledge production. Now that post-modernism is out of fashion, the emphasis is no longer on the "cursed" questions formulated by its adepts. The main issue is no longer whether it is possible to attain knowledge which corresponds to reality. Rather, the new set of questions addresses the issue of how we attain such knowledge. The discourse on knowability has also broadened and now involves a variety of disciplines that span the traditionally separate domains of sciences and humanities. The article focuses on the problem of paradox as it relates to the broader issue of knowledge production and the process of construction in general. It examines paradoxes in contemporary physics as they relate to how knowledge is produced and sees the resolution of the problem of paradox in a better understanding of the construction of knowledge. Viewed from this perspective, paradoxes no longer appear as structural limitations of human capacity to know, but rather they become powerful tools which help to make knowledge production more efficient. Key words: paradox, Schrödinger's cat, locality, non-locality, self-organization
The legacy of Post-Modernism is renewed attention to the issues of knowledge production. Now that post-modernism is out of fashion, the emphasis is no longer on the "cursed" questions formulated by its adepts. The main issue is no longer whether it is possible to attain knowledge which corresponds to reality. Rather, the new set of questions addresses the issue of how we attain such knowledge. The discourse on knowability has also broadened and now involves a variety of disciplines that span the traditionally separate domains of sciences and humanities. The article focuses on the problem of paradox as it relates to the broader issue of knowledge production and the process of construction in general. It examines paradoxes in contemporary physics as they relate to how knowledge is produced and sees the resolution of the problem of paradox in a better understanding of the construction of knowledge. Viewed from this perspective, paradoxes no longer appear as structural limitations of human capacity to know, but rather they become powerful tools which help to make knowledge production more efficient. Key words: paradox, Schrödinger's cat, locality, non-locality, self-organization
The book presents a multidisciplinary analysis of the context of quantum physics experiments and the function of the human mind that makes it possible to demonstrate that an object-based model of reality formed at the level of the unconscious is the basis of our worldview. The consciousness experiences a ''time flow'' because of the specific features of perception in the form of a model with a sequential fixation of events. Together with the need to relate objects in terms of the model, this generates a space-time representation of the world around us. Acceptance of a mental character of our construct of reality allows for resolution of the problems in quantum physics and its paradoxes, thereby opening the way to an insight into reality. The presented material is organized in a specific order to facilitate the reader's understanding. First, the fact that if there are no objects in the area of quantum mechanics, then they belong to the corresponding model rather than the reality is proved by case studies of the most discussed and relevant paradoxes of quantum physics. The authors consider a topological variant in constructing an object-based space that describes the physical properties of an object that are the most verified in science and describable with mathematical relations. The functionality of the proposed construct is tested by deriving the ''laws'' of conservation of energy and momentum in a relativistic form. The book is oriented towards experts in physics and psychology, advanced students, and readers interested in state-of-the-art science and the philosophy connected to it.
This article reconsiders E. Schrödinger's cat paradox experiment from a new perspective, grounded in the interpretation of quantum mechanics that belongs to the class of interpretations designated as "reality without realism" (RWR) interpretations. These interpretations assume that the reality ultimately responsible for quantum phenomena is beyond conception, an assumption designated as the Heisenberg postulate. Accordingly, in these interpretations, quantum physics is understood in terms of the relationships between what is thinkable and what is unthinkable, with, physical, classical, and quantum, corresponding to thinkable and unthinkable, respectively. The role of classical physics becomes unavoidable in quantum physics, the circumstance designated as the Bohr postulate, which restores to classical physics its position as part of fundamental physics, a position commonly reserved for quantum physics and relativity. This view of quantum physics and relativity is maintained by this article as well but is argued to be sufficient for understanding fundamental physics. Establishing this role of classical physics is a distinctive contribution of the article, which allows it to reconsider Schrödinger's cat experiment, but has a broader significance for understanding fundamental physics. RWR interpretations have not been previously applied to the cat experiment, including by N. Bohr, whose interpretation, in its ultimate form (he changed it a few times), was an RWR interpretation. The interpretation adopted in this article follows Bohr's interpretation, based on the Heisenberg and Bohr postulates, but it adds the Dirac postulate, stating that the concept of a quantum object only applies at the time of observation and not independently.
Quantum mechanics is certainly a strange place to start an investigation into the nature of the relationship between science and society. However, this article begins by integrating its history and proceeds through current conceptions of it by some physicists to examine quantum mechanics as an intersection of both science and knowledge. A famous thought experiment by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen pointed to an area that few physicists still research–a paradigm gone awry. Yet the vast majority of physiciststoday do not agonize over this uncertainty. Physics today presses forward with indominable speed and precision. But by questioning a small sample of physicists doing physics about their practice, this study aims at an everyday physicist’s understanding of the matter; a paradox that lies between the results of experiment and their interpretation or place as knowledge in society. For Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen, the paradox was that we can only determine the spin of an entangled particle–it only becomes real–after measuring the spin of its partner particle. For a few contemporary physicists, the problem is how to understand the fact that a measured particle “teleports” its state instantaniously to another point in space. Practicing physicist resolve this, to put it simply, by just using it. Quantum mechanics, as with physics, is incredibly accurate–accepting it as truth yields results that physicists and society can use. By interrogating this process in its historicity and current formulation, this article sheds some light on the way physics works as knowledge. It provides a possibility for turning the scientific eye toward the very meaning of science.
ABSTRACT: The theory of decoherence, provided we accept its validity, partially solves the quantum-macro clash as it had been seen few decades before. Namely, the theory of decoherence permits us to understand (better) why a given macro-system, in contrast to the quantum entities that compose it, does not superpose simultaneously several possible states. Subsequently, the theory of decoherence partially solves the paradox stemming from the Gedankenexperiment known as “Schrodinger's cat”. In terms of decoherence, it seems reasonable to admit that the feline, independently from any measurement process, is either alive or dead, but never superposes these mutually exclusive states. On the other hand, the resolution of a second essential aspect of the quantum-macro clash cannot find any help from the theory of decoherence. While now the overall wave packet reduction by the macroscopic environment of each quantum phenomenon manifesting itself at our scale seems quite plausible, the theory of decoherence does not explain from where our macroscopic world – ultimately irreducible to the only quantum axioms and laws – could emerge. In other words, whereas the macro-non-superposition problem seems almost solved, the supra-quantum emergence problem entirely persists. From the (current) perspective of the macroscopic non-superposition problem, Schrodinger's cat perhaps retains only a historical interest . But in the present paper, we will try to show that in the context of the supra-quantum emergence problem, the “cat” continues to have a specific relevant significance. On the other hand, it seems commonly admitted that the special status of the “cat” as a representative of living matter does not have any intrinsic meaning within the Gedankenexperiment. Other antithetical “macroscopic superpositions” such as a broken-intact phial or simply the needle of a measurement apparatus pointing simultaneously upwards and downwards would express the same message than the dead-living “cat.” However, here we aim to prove that the living matter status of the “cat”, when related to the supra-quantum emergence problem, does have – despite its author – an intrinsic signification which the modern philosophy of science generally denies. Indirectly inspired by certain assumptions of the neo-Darwinian biologist Ernst Mayr denoting that the existence of living matter expresses a key aspect of the supra-quantum emergence problem, this paper is purposed to establish 1° that the efficient elucidation of the supra-quantum emergence problem should have a formally and experimentally operating “general systems theory” according to Ludwig von Bertalanffy, 2° that this “general systems theory” still looking for its own scientificity remains until further notice reduced to a kind of not entirely full scientific “world vision” or “intellectual attitude” commonly called “holism”. 3° that a generally neglected text passage of Schrodinger's article “Die gegenwartige Situation in der Quantenmechanik” containing the “cat” closely anticipates – despite its author and far ahead of time – the fundamental assumption of “general systems theory”, i.e. “the whole transcends the 'sum' of its parts”, 4° that the factors ensuring the powerful formal consistence of quantum physics are – except for one determining detail – the same which hamper the creation of a scientifically relevant “general systems theory” and, subsequently, impede the elucidation of the supra-quantum emergence problem.
In his famous thought experiment, Schrodinger(1935) imagined a cat that measures the value of a quantum mechanical observable with its life. Since Schrodinger’s time,no any interpretations or modifications of quantum mechanics have been proposed which gives clear unambiguous answers to the questions posed by Schrodinger’s cat of how long superpositions last and when (or whether) they collapse?In this book appropriate modification of quantum mechanics is proposed.We claim that canonical interpretation of the wave function ψ=с1ψ1+с2ψ2 is correct only when the wave function supports ψ1 and ψ2 essentially overlap. When these ones have separated supports we claim that canonical interpretation of the wave function ψ is no longer valid for a such cat state.Possible solution of the Schrodinger’s cat paradox is considered. We pointed out that the collapsed state of the cat always shows definite and predictable outcomes even if the cat also consists of a superposition:|cat>=с1|alive cat>+с2|death cat>.Using new quantum mechanical formalism the EPRB-paradox is considered.We find that the EPRB-paradox can be resolved by nonprincipal and convenient relaxing of the Einstein’s locality principle.
This article focuses on the problem of the authenticity of knowledge. It argues that the failure to integrate the observer into the act of observing is the main source of the disagreements and divisions in contemporary science and scholarship. The article uses the quantum debate as a case study to illustrate this point. It also argues that a truly non-classical epistemology should abandon the traditional subject-object orientation and focus on the very process of construction which creates both the subject and the object. The understanding of this process in terms of the equilibrium between equilibrium and disequilibrium will be critical for such epistemological perspective. The article concludes with some illustrations that show how the new perspective can help resolve the paradoxes which plague contemporary knowledge. Key words: the quantum debate, non-classical epistemology, paradox of observing