Ockham's razor is a heuristic concept applied in philosophy of science to decide between two or more feasible physical theories. Ockham's razor operates by deciding in favour of the theory with least assumptions and concepts; roughly speaking, the less complex theory. Could Ockham's razor not easily treat the different interpretations as theories and decide in favour of the one with fewest assumptions? We provide an answer to this question by means of examples of applications in literature and the discussion of its historical origin. We review the historical context of Ockham's razor and its connection to medieval philosophical struggles, discuss the essence of its parsimonious core and put it in relation with modern struggles in the context of interpretational issues in Quantum Mechanics. Due to the lack of experimental evidences in string theory, a new field of modern heuristics arose in the last years. We will discuss these heuristics in the context of Ockham-related heuristic methods and analyse the connection of these heuristics with the interpretations of Quantum Mechanics.
Ockham's razor is a heuristic concept applied in philosophy of science to decide between two or more feasible physical theories. Ockham's razor operates by deciding in favour of the theory with least assumptions and concepts; roughly speaking, the less complex theory. Could Ockham's razor not easily treat the different interpretations as theories and decide in favour of the one with fewest assumptions? We provide an answer to this question by means of examples of applications in literature and the discussion of its historical origin. We review the historical context of Ockham's razor and its connection to medieval philosophical struggles, discuss the essence of its parsimonious core and put it in relation with modern struggles in the context of interpretational issues in Quantum Mechanics. Due to the lack of experimental evidences in string theory, a new field of modern heuristics arose in the last years. We will discuss these heuristics in the context of Ockham-related heuristic methods and analyse the connection of these heuristics with the interpretations of Quantum Mechanics.
This is a philosophy-intense physics article, or, if you wish, a physics-intense philosophy article. Also, being a mathematician, I tend to view the physics, in particular the essence of quantum physics, in emphasizing the mathematical structure that serves as its language. However, I do express views on typically philosophical/epistemological matters. Since these points of view do not seem to me too widely expressed in the literature, while I find them quite compelling, I think this note has some interest.
Many different interpretations of the Quantum Theory have appeared over the one hundred years since its first formulation.The paper presents a detailed physical analysis of the process of quantum measurement, which is crucial in the development of a sound interpretation of the theory.The process of quantum measurement can be decomposed into three elementary steps, and the projection of state (or collapse of the wave function) is applied at the last step, the reading of the result of measurement by an observer.This determines a crystal clear simplest interpretation of the process and the alternative interpretation, supported by many interpretations of the theory, is obviously much more complex, so that Ockham's razor can be applied.Once this is established, a corresponding interpretation of the quantum state follows.We discuss some important issues as the superposition of states (or Schrodinger cat states), the wave particle duality and the non-local process associated to entanglement.In conclusion, many of the proposed interpretations of Quantum Mechanics appeared along the last decades can be firmly rejected, but there are open questions.
This chapter, based on the background information of the previous chapter, will review the formalism of quantum mechanics – its fundamental mathematical structure (the basic contents of Hilbert space representation and operator algebra representation) and physical assumptions (kinematics, dynamics, and measurement theory). These are the premise and foundation for discussing the quantum histories interpretation. Then, in combination with the viewpoints of some literature in recent years, we will explore what is the interpretation of quantum mechanics, analyze the relationship between the theory of quantum mechanics and its interpretation, and declare the author’s basic stance on these two issues. These two are the primary issues that all interpretive work in the philosophy of physics will face (not limited to the interpretation of quantum mechanics), and the necessary clarification here is also conducive to the subsequent discussion. Three common terms – theory, formalism, and interpretation – are explicated and differentiated by offering the necessary definitions of their meanings, based on the works of Acuña and Ruetsche. The clarification will help to make the subsequent related discussions more precise.
A physical theory consists of the mathematical formalism and an interpretation, which contains the definition of symbols, measurement assignments, concepts and principles, and an ontology. We present a scheme to classify these different levels of a physical theory and apply it to Newtonian Mechanics and the interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. We show that this classification scheme is embedded in the methodology of philosophy of science. With this scheme, different interpretations of Quantum Mechanics can be compared concerning the formalism and the used conceptions, and it serves as a guidance to identify ontological entities and reality conceptions in the different interpretations. Inspired by the commitments on the ontological level, we propose two heuristics concerning ontological statements.
Quantum mechanics, the physical theory describing the microworld, is one of science's greatest triumphs. Remarkably, however, after more than 100 years it is still unclear what quantum mechanics means in terms of basic philosophical questions about the nature of reality. While there are many interpretations of the mathematical machinery of quantum physics, there remain no experimental means to distinguish between most of them. In this contribution, I wish to consider the ways in which the enduring lack of an agreed-upon interpretation of quantum physics influences a number of critical philosophical debates about physics and reality. I briefly review two problems affected by quantum interpretations: the meaning of the term universe and the nature of consciousness.
This chapter, along with the next two chapters, sets the basic context for the readers to go into the topic of this book. Physicists, mathematicians, and philosophers struggle to clarify the foundations of quantum mechanics and debate on the interpretations of quantum mechanics. What is the foundation of quantum mechanics and how to interpret the formalism of quantum mechanics are the core issues of concern in the philosophy of physics. These two questions also involve fundamental issues in the general philosophy of science and even metaphysics and epistemology. This chapter introduces the original thoughts, historical developments, and current status of the interpretation of quantum mechanics, as well as its connection with the philosophy of science and metaphysics; it also analyzes the classifications by Bell, Leifer, and Cabello on the spectrum of interpretations of quantum mechanics, which can be regarded as a sort of “navigation map”. On this basis, the main object of discussion in this book is introduced – the quantum histories interpretation.