Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Springer eBooks

Remarks on a Structural Account of Scientific Explanation

Laura Felline

Published Jan 1, 2010• 5 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/978-90-481-3252-2_5

Related papers

Scientific Explanation and Scientific Structuralism

Mauro Dorato, Laura Felline

Boston studies in the philosophy of science•Jan 1, 2010•27 citations

Statistical indeterminism and scientific explanation

Jan Srzednicki

Synthese•Dec 1, 1973•2 citations

Explanation and Scientific Progress: The Case of Quantum Entanglement

Arthur I. Fine

•Jan 1, 2006•0 citations

Phenomena and Theory

Peter J. Lewis

Abstract The distinctively quantum mechanical phenomena of interference and entanglement are explained. The theory of quantum mechanics that accounts for these phenomena is presented in its two forms: matrix mechanics and wave mechanics. It is argued that while these accounts have some of the superficial trappings of scientific explanation, they fail to provide an explanation in the sense of a description of the entities or properties responsible for the phenomena. In fact, the theory is remarkably silent regarding the physical states represented by the theory. The need for an interpretation of the quantum formalism—a way of understanding it as descriptive of the world—is defended.

•Aug 18, 2016•1 citation

The Epistemic View Upon Science

Inge Svein Helland

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 2018•0 citations

Can Classical Structures Explain Quantum Phenomena?

Alisa Bokulich

In semiclassical mechanics one finds explanations of quantum phenomena that appeal to classical structures. These explanations are prima facie problematic insofar as the classical structures they appeal to do not exist. Here I defend the view that fictional structures can be genuinely explanatory by introducing a model-based account of scientific explanation. Applying this framework to the semiclassical phenomenon of wavefunction scarring, I argue that not only can the fictional classical trajectories explain certain aspects of this quantum phenomenon, but also that an explanation that does not make reference to these classical structures is, in a certain sense, deficient. 1. Introduction2. The Case of Wavefunction Scarring3. Model Explanations, or How Fictional Structures Can Explain4. Putting Understanding Back into Explanation

The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science•May 24, 2008•77 citations
Abstract The distinctively quantum mechanical phenomena of interference and entanglement are explained. The theory of quantum mechanics that accounts for these phenomena is presented in its two forms: matrix mechanics and wave mechanics. It is argued that while these accounts have some of the superficial trappings of scientific explanation, they fail to provide an explanation in the sense of a description of the entities or properties responsible for the phenomena. In fact, the theory is remarkably silent regarding the physical states represented by the theory. The need for an interpretation of the quantum formalism—a way of understanding it as descriptive of the world—is defended.
In semiclassical mechanics one finds explanations of quantum phenomena that appeal to classical structures. These explanations are prima facie problematic insofar as the classical structures they appeal to do not exist. Here I defend the view that fictional structures can be genuinely explanatory by introducing a model-based account of scientific explanation. Applying this framework to the semiclassical phenomenon of wavefunction scarring, I argue that not only can the fictional classical trajectories explain certain aspects of this quantum phenomenon, but also that an explanation that does not make reference to these classical structures is, in a certain sense, deficient. 1. Introduction2. The Case of Wavefunction Scarring3. Model Explanations, or How Fictional Structures Can Explain4. Putting Understanding Back into Explanation