arXiv:2102.13500 · Entropy

Quantum Randomness is Chimeric

Karl Svozil

Published Apr 24, 2021• 8 citations

Abstract

If quantum mechanics is taken for granted, the randomness derived from it may be vacuous or even delusional, yet sufficient for many practical purposes. "Random" quantum events are intimately related to the emergence of both space-time as well as the identification of physical properties through which so-called objects are aggregated. We also present a brief review of the metaphysics of indeterminism.

DOI: 10.3390/e23050519

Related papers

The Chimerical Cat: Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics in Historical Perspective

Stephen G. Brush

The establishment of the Heisenberg-Schrodinger quantum mechanics in 1926 was undoubtedly the most important event m the history of twentieth-century science - for science itself, even if not for society. One might therefore suppose that the metaphysical conclusions associated with quantum mechanics are a major part of our present view of the world The purpose of this paper is to show that two of these conclusions - indeterminism, and the denial of independent reality to atomic properties - are not unique to quantum mechanics, but emerged as the culmination of historical trends begun m the nineteenth century It postulates cyclic oscillation between 'Romantic' and 'Realist' periods m science and culture, and ascribes a gradual breakdown of belief in determinism to debates about irreversibility. Albert Einstein's opposition to the 'Copenhagen Interpretation' of quantum mechanics was based on a preference for realism as much as a dislike for indeterminism, and the 'Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox' was a formidable challenge to subjectivist instrumentalism. Following the revival of realist interpretations m the 1950s, new experiments seem to have reconfirmed the subjectivist view But there is currently strong disagreement on what kind of subjectivism is scientifically legitimate; John Wheeler's version of the 'anthropic principle' and parapsychological explanations both conflict with the naive realism that has dominated the Western Intellectual tradition since the seventeenth century.

Social Studies of ScienceNov 1, 198035 citations

The Quantum and the Random: Similarities, Differences, and “Contradictions”

Jan-Åke Larsson

This paper makes an attempt to present Quantum Mechanics in simple terms, but without oversimplification. It will be in essence, a comparison of the usual understanding of randomness to the more difficult notion of “quantumness.” The restricted format of this paper will unfortunately force the presentation to be very terse. But perhaps this paper can be seen as a synopsis of the approach I have in mind.

AIP conference proceedingsJan 1, 20060 citations

Quantum Randomness and Underdetermination

Jeffrey Alan Barrett, Simon M. Huttegger

We consider the nature of quantum randomness and how one might have empirical evidence for it. We will see why, depending on one’s computational resources, it may be impossible to determine whether a particular notion of randomness properly characterizes one’s empirical data. Indeed, we will see why even an ideal observer under ideal epistemic conditions may never have any empirical evidence whatsoever for believing that the results of one’s quantum-mechanical experiments are randomly determined. This illustrates a radical sort of empirical underdetermination faced by fundamentally stochastic theories like quantum mechanics.

Philosophy of ScienceFeb 20, 202022 citations

Quantum-like Data Modeling in Applied Sciences: Review

Stan Lipovetsky

This work presents a brief review on the modern approaches to data modeling by the methods developed in the quantum physics during the last one hundred years. Quantum computers and computations have already been widely investigated theoretically and attempted in some practical implementations, but methods of quantum data modeling are not yet sufficiently established. A vast range of concepts and methods of quantum mechanics have been tried in many fields of information and behavior sciences, including communications and artificial intelligence, cognition and decision making, sociology and psychology, biology and economics, financial and political studies. The application of quantum methods in areas other than physics is called the quantum-like paradigm, meaning that such approaches may not be related to the physical processes but rather correspond to data modeling by the methods designed for operating in conditions of uncertainty. This review aims to attract attention to the possibilities of these methods of data modeling that can enrich theoretical consideration and be useful for practical purposes in various sciences and applications.

StatsFeb 17, 20234 citations

Is “Physical Randomness” Just Indeterminism in Disguise?

Paul W. Humphreys

The topic of this session is “physical randomness”. It might be doubted whether such a subject exists, for definitions of randomness have hitherto almost all been mathematical in nature. The only exceptions of which I am aware are the preceding paper by Benioff and a paper by Wesley Salmon. These attempts to inject some empirical content into randomness are highly desirable. But anyone attempting to formulate a physically based definition of randomness should at some point make clear what the connection is (if any) with a more traditional notion of disorder - that of indeterminism. Repeated reference to quantum mechanical examples whenever physical randomness is discussed indicates that a primary motivation for considering physical randomness to be important is because of the current belief that data sequences associated with quantum mechanical experiments are irreducibly random. (As an indication of this, in any situation in which physical randomness is discussed, translate the remarks about quantum phenomena into remarks about coin tossing, and they will lose much of their interest.)

PSA Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science AssociationJan 1, 19786 citations

Reality as Fields, Events, and Cascades of Convergence A conversation-derived framework for understanding quantum fields, particles, consciousness, and everything in between

Reddy Govind

Author's Note: This paper proposes a speculative ontological framework, not an empirical theory. Its claims are offered as a new direction of inquiry. Where they conflict with established physics they should be taken as questions, not corrections. Where they illuminate what established physics leaves obscure, they may be worth pursuing. The future will determine which is which. This paper distils a sustained conceptual dialogue into a coherent framework for understanding the deep structure of physical reality — written for anyone who thinks carefully, not only for specialists. The central argument is this: reality is not made of objects. It is made of fields and events. Quantum fields are immortal, pre-propertied substrates — the only permanent things in existence. Particles are not objects sitting inside fields; they are brief events that occur when conditions inside the field converge sufficiently. What we call objects — rocks, mountains, you, stars — are events of longer duration, not a different category of thing. And what drives the cascade from quantum fields all the way to minds is not a programme being run by anyone: it is the continuous convergence of events with other events, each convergence producing new stable patterns with genuinely new properties that could not have been predicted from the level below. The framework draws a precise analogy with software — fields are like classes, particles like instantiated objects — and then identifies exactlywhere the analogy breaks down and why that break matters profoundly: software needs a programmer; nature does not. Nature is bootstrapped.

Jan 1, 20260 citations