The problem of the determinism of Quantum Mechanics has been a main one during the 20th century. At the same time, in the context of Logic and Set Theory, the importance of ancient paradoxes as well as the appearance of many new ones, has shed light on and deeply influenced the foundations of Mathematics and somehow of Physics. But, strangely, concerning Physics, a paradox which we call the Memory Paradox has remained yet undiscovered, despite its simplicity and remarkable consequences, mostly in Physics and surprisingly in classical Physics that appear to be non deterministic, contrary to the general belief since Newton, Laplace, etc.. The non determinism of Quantum Physics follows without any supplementary hypothesis. This paper extends a previous one (arXiv: 1203.2945v1 [physics.gen-ph] 13 Mar 2012).
The problem of the determinism of Quantum Mechanics has been a main one during the 20th century. At the same time, in the context of Logic and Set Theory, the importance of ancient paradoxes as well as the appearance of many new ones, has shed light on and deeply influenced the foundations of Mathematics and somehow of Physics. But, strangely, concerning Physics, a paradox which we call the Memory Paradox has remained yet undiscovered, despite its simplicity and remarkable consequences, mostly in Physics and surprisingly in classical Physics that appear to be non deterministic, contrary to the general belief since Newton, Laplace, etc.. The non determinism of Quantum Physics follows without any supplementary hypothesis. This paper extends a previous one (arXiv: 1203.2945v1 [physics.gen-ph] 13 Mar 2012).
Concept of has had many transformations throughout the history of physics, and it has been so influential in this field. However, with the growth of quantum physics, became a scientific dilemma and has created many challenges in various contemporary sciences. If this concept is understood correctly, many misconceptions corresponding to it in natural sciences, especially physics can be removed. The aim of this paper is to investigate this concept analytically to solve the existing problems. To do this, first we consider the terminology of including characteristic, necessary connection, and exact prediction. Then, William James definition of determinism, Laplacian determinism, Popper definition of determinism, causal determinism, logical determinism, epistemic determinism, metaphysical determinism, and theological are introduced. After which, we pay attention to different kinds of including global/local domain, complete/incomplete form, and the main factor in the formation of events. In the next step, it is discussed that although had been vague and causal in ancient Greece, it has become global and theological in middle Ages. In classical physics, it took a complete and universal form. Laplace provided the most complete picture of determinism. Because of some philosophical ideas, changed into a different concept in quantum mechanics. Copenhagen school physicists, especially Bohr, regarded determinism as a problem and an undesirable element. It is shown that is a complex subject with a number of aspects and characteristics which cannot be set aside from the science. The final result is that cannot be denied in the science; in particular, the quantum mechanics is a deterministic theory but in an incomplete or local manner.
In this work we analyze the deep link between the 20th Century positivist re-foundation of physics and the famous measurement problem of quantum mechanics. We attempt to show why this is not an "obvious" nor "self evident" problem for the theory of quanta, but rather a direct consequence of the empirical-positivist understanding of physical theories when applied to the orthodox quantum formalism. In contraposition, we discuss a representational realist account of both physical 'theories' and 'measurement' which goes back to the works of Einstein, Heisenberg and Pauli. After presenting a critical analysis of Bohr's definitions of 'measurement' we continue to discuss the way in which several contemporary approaches to QM --such as decoherence, modal interpretations and QBism-- remain committed to Bohr's general methodology. Finally, in order to expose the many inconsistencies present within the (empirical-positivist) presuppositions responsible for creating the quantum measurement problem, we show how through these same set of presuppositions it is easy to derive a completely analogous paradox for the case of classical mechanics.
Quantum theory has played a significant role in modern philosophy both as a source of metaphysical ideas and as an important example of a 'scientific revolution'. In spite of the sixty or so years that have elapsed since its invention, a long lasting controversy concerning the interpretation and meaning of quantum theory prevails. Almost all authors, however, seem to agree on one major point, namely, that there could be no interpretation of this theory which is both realistic and local.;The purpose of this thesis is to demonstrate that this premiss is false and that a realistic, local and deterministic interpretation of quantum theory (at least of part of it) does exist, provided that we extend the classical concept of probability.;In order to establish this a 'quasi classical' probability theory is developed based on some non Lebesgue measurable 'events', which is then applied to account for spin-statistics. Finally I note how this model reflects on the problems of physical realism, locality, the status of probability theory and the philosophical foundations of mathematics.
Quantum theory (QT) has been confirmed by numerous experiments, yet we still cannot fully grasp the meaning of the theory. As a consequence, the quantum world appears to us paradoxical. Here we shed new light on QT by having it follow from two main postulates (i) the theory should be logically consistent; (ii) inferences in the theory should be computable in polynomial time. The first postulate is what we require to each well-founded mathematical theory. The computation postulate defines the physical component of the theory. We show that the computation postulate is the only true divide between QT, seen as a generalised theory of probability, and classical probability. All quantum paradoxes, and entanglement in particular, arise from the clash of trying to reconcile a computationally intractable, somewhat idealised, theory (classical physics) with a computationally tractable theory (QT) or, in other words, from regarding physics as fundamental rather than computation.
Although the concept of an observing device with memory is very simple and definable in terms of algorithmic machine, it is not compatible with a predictive theory involving this concept. This is sufficient to show that Physics as a whole cannot be deterministic; moreover, using the Conway-Kochen Free Will Theorem [1] and the simple logical proof of it we gave in [2], we show, without any need of free will or observer's freedom, that neither Quantum Mechanics nor any extension of this theory can be deterministic.
Some mostly recent theoretical and mathematical advances can be linked together to yield a new consistent interpretation of quantum mechanics. It relies upon a unique and universal interpretative rule of a logical character which is based upon Griffiths consistent historie. Some new results in semi-classical physics allow to derive classical physics from this rule, including its logical aspects, and to prove accordingly the existence of determinism within the quantum framework. Together with decoherence, this can be used to retrieve the existence of facts, despite the probabilistic character of the theory. Measurement theory can then be made entirely deductive. It is accordingly found that wave packet reduction is a logical property, whereas one can always choose to avoid using it. The practical consequences of this interpretation are most often in agreement with the Copenhagen formulation but they can be proved never to give rise to any logical inconsistency or paradox.