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

Physica Scripta

What is complementarity?: Niels Bohr and the architecture of quantum theory

Arkady Plotnitsky

Published Dec 1, 2014• 14 citations
Publisher

Abstract

This article explores Bohr's argument, advanced under the heading of 'complementarity,' concerning quantum phenomena and quantum mechanics, and its physical and philosophical implications.In Bohr, the term complementarity designates both a particular concept and an overall interpretation of quantum phenomena and quantum mechanics, in part grounded in this concept.While the argument of this article is primarily philosophical, it will also address, historically, the development and transformations of Bohr's thinking, under the impact of the development of quantum theory and Bohr's confrontation with Einstein, especially their exchange concerning the EPR experiment, proposed by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen in 1935.Bohr's interpretation was progressively characterized by a more radical epistemology, in its ultimate form, which was developed in the 1930s and with which I shall be especially concerned here, defined by his new concepts of phenomenon and atomicity.According to this epistemology, quantum objects are seen as indescribable and possibly even as inconceivable, and as manifesting their existence only in the effects of their interactions with measuring instruments upon those instruments, effects that define phenomena in Bohr's sense.The absence of causality is an automatic consequence of this epistemology.I shall also consider how probability and statistics work under these epistemological conditions.

DOI
10.1088/0031-8949/2014/t163/014002

Related papers

‘The agency of observation not to be neglected’: complementarity, causality and the arrow of events in quantum and quantum-like theories

Arkady Plotnitsky

The argument of this article is grounded in the irreducible interference of observational instruments in our interactions with nature in quantum physics and, thus, in the constitution of quantum phenomena versus classical physics, where this interference can, in principle, be disregarded. The irreducible character of this interference was seen by N. Bohr as the principal distinction between classical and quantum physics and grounded his interpretation of quantum phenomena and quantum theory. Bohr saw complementarity as a generalization of the classical ideal of causality, which defined classical physics and relativity. While intimated by Bohr, the relationships among observational technology, complementarity, causality and the arrow of events (a new concept that replaces the arrow of time commonly used in this context) were not addressed by him either. The article introduces another new concept, that of quantum causality, as a form of probabilistic causality. The argument of the article is based on a particular interpretation of quantum phenomena and quantum theory, defined by the concept of 'reality without realism (RWR)'. This interpretation follows Bohr's interpretation but contains certain additional features, in particular the Dirac postulate. The article also considers quantum-like (Q-L) theories (based in the mathematics of QM) from the perspective it develops. This article is part of the theme issue 'Thermodynamics 2.0: Bridging the natural and social sciences (Part 2)'.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences•Aug 13, 2023•6 citations

Objectivity on Quantum Events: The Principle of Complementarity and the Rortian Perspective

Nalliely Hernández Cornejo

In this writing, I reconstruct the Principle of Complementarity in Quantum Mechanics, elaborated by Niels Bohr, and the conception of objectivity implied in it (and in Bohr's writings).Then, I connect it with the epistemological pragmatism of the philosopher Richard Rorty.My aim is to reinterpret some issues of this quantum description that concern the category of objectivity from the Rortian perspective in a plausible way.This allows me to connect in a positive and a negative sense some quantum (and Bohrian) assumptions to the Rortian perspective, but mainly, it allows to reconsider the framework of scientific objects from the modern perspective to a new pragmatist and anti-essentialist point of view.

Philosophy study•Apr 28, 2016•0 citations

Biología y filosofía de la complementariedad en Niels Bohr

Karim Gherab Martín

This article discusses Niels Bohr's philosophy of complementarity in the field of biology. To do this, it shows how the concept of complementarity arises in quantum physics and how Bohr generalizes it so that to apply it to biology. Likewise, the article looks for the philosophical sources that give rise to the philosophy of complementarity and concludes that said philosophy is oriented towards an epistemological, rather than an ontological, analysis of subatomic objects and living beings.

Bajo Palabra•Nov 26, 2020•5 citations

"It's best not to think about it at all-like the new taxes": Reality, observer, and complementarity in Bohr and Pauli

Arkady Plotnitsky

This article considers the concepts of reality, observer, and complementarity in Pauli and Bohr, and the similarities and, especially, differences in their understanding of these concepts, differences defined most essentially by their respective views of the role of the human observer in quantum measurement. These differences are significant even in the case of their respective interpretations of quantum phenomena and quantum mechanics, where the influence of Bohr's ideas on Pauli's understanding of quantum physics is particularly strong. They become especially strong and even radical in the case of their overall philosophical visions, where the impact of Jungean psychology, coupled to that of the earlier archetypal thinking of such figures as Kepler and Fludd, drives Pauli's thinking ever further away from that of Bohr.

AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2012•5 citations

Einstein’s Local Realism vs. Bohr’s Instrumental Anti-Realism: The Debate Between Two Titans in the Quantum Theory Arena

Eduardo Simões

The objective of this article is to demonstrate how the historical debate between materialism and idealism, in the field of Philosophy, extends, in new clothes, to the field of Quantum Physics characterized by realism and anti-realism. For this, we opted for a debate, also historical, between the realism of Albert Einstein, for whom reality exists regardless of the existence of the knowing subject, and Niels Bohr, for whom we do not have access to the ultimate reality of the matter, unless conditioning it to the existence of an observer endowed with rationality, position adopted in the Interpretation of Complementarity (1927) – posture that was expanded in 1935 when Bohr assumed a “relationalist” conception, according to which the quantum state is defined by the relationship between the quantum object and the entire measuring device. This is an extremely important debate, as it further consolidates the results of nascent Quantum Mechanics, guaranteeing Bohr the leadership of the orthodoxy based on the interpretation of complementarity. Here, when dealing with Quantum Theory, we will not make any distinction between the terms Quantum Physics, Quantum Theory or Quantum Mechanics. The entire discussion will be held under the name “Quantum Theory”. Theory that tries to analyze and describe the behavior of physical systems of reduced dimensions, close to the sizes of molecules, atoms and subatomic particles. We hope that the reader will appreciate the genius of these two titans in this field of Physics when they magnificently formulate the arguments that support the object of their defenses.

Griot Revista de Filosofia•Jun 2, 2021•0 citations

Einstein’s Local Realism vs. Bohr’s Instrumental Anti-Realism: The Debate Between Two Titans in the Quantum Theory Arena

Eduardo Simões

The objective of this article is to demonstrate how the historical debate between materialism and idealism, in the field of Philosophy, extends, in new clothes, to the field of Quantum Physics characterized by realism and anti-realism. For this, we opted for a debate, also historical, between the realism of Albert Einstein, for whom reality exists regardless of the existence of the knowing subject, and Niels Bohr, for whom we do not have access to the ultimate reality of the matter, unless conditioning it to the existence of an observer endowed with rationality, position adopted in the Interpretation of Complementarity (1927) – posture that was expanded in 1935 when Bohr assumed a “relationalist” conception, according to which the quantum state is defined by the relationship between the quantum object and the entire measuring device. This is an extremely important debate, as it further consolidates the results of nascent Quantum Mechanics, guaranteeing Bohr the leadership of the orthodoxy based on the interpretation of complementarity. Here, when dealing with Quantum Theory, we will not make any distinction between the terms Quantum Physics, Quantum Theory or Quantum Mechanics. The entire discussion will be held under the name “Quantum Theory”. Theory that tries to analyze and describe the behavior of physical systems of reduced dimensions, close to the sizes of molecules, atoms and subatomic particles. We hope that the reader will appreciate the genius of these two titans in this field of Physics when they magnificently formulate the arguments that support the object of their defenses.

Griot Revista de Filosofia•Jun 2, 2021•0 citations
This article explores Bohr's argument, advanced under the heading of 'complementarity,' concerning quantum phenomena and quantum mechanics, and its physical and philosophical implications.In Bohr, the term complementarity designates both a particular concept and an overall interpretation of quantum phenomena and quantum mechanics, in part grounded in this concept.While the argument of this article is primarily philosophical, it will also address, historically, the development and transformations of Bohr's thinking, under the impact of the development of quantum theory and Bohr's confrontation with Einstein, especially their exchange concerning the EPR experiment, proposed by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen in 1935.Bohr's interpretation was progressively characterized by a more radical epistemology, in its ultimate form, which was developed in the 1930s and with which I shall be especially concerned here, defined by his new concepts of phenomenon and atomicity.According to this epistemology, quantum objects are seen as indescribable and possibly even as inconceivable, and as manifesting their existence only in the effects of their interactions with measuring instruments upon those instruments, effects that define phenomena in Bohr's sense.The absence of causality is an automatic consequence of this epistemology.I shall also consider how probability and statistics work under these epistemological conditions.
The argument of this article is grounded in the irreducible interference of observational instruments in our interactions with nature in quantum physics and, thus, in the constitution of quantum phenomena versus classical physics, where this interference can, in principle, be disregarded. The irreducible character of this interference was seen by N. Bohr as the principal distinction between classical and quantum physics and grounded his interpretation of quantum phenomena and quantum theory. Bohr saw complementarity as a generalization of the classical ideal of causality, which defined classical physics and relativity. While intimated by Bohr, the relationships among observational technology, complementarity, causality and the arrow of events (a new concept that replaces the arrow of time commonly used in this context) were not addressed by him either. The article introduces another new concept, that of quantum causality, as a form of probabilistic causality. The argument of the article is based on a particular interpretation of quantum phenomena and quantum theory, defined by the concept of 'reality without realism (RWR)'. This interpretation follows Bohr's interpretation but contains certain additional features, in particular the Dirac postulate. The article also considers quantum-like (Q-L) theories (based in the mathematics of QM) from the perspective it develops. This article is part of the theme issue 'Thermodynamics 2.0: Bridging the natural and social sciences (Part 2)'.
In this writing, I reconstruct the Principle of Complementarity in Quantum Mechanics, elaborated by Niels Bohr, and the conception of objectivity implied in it (and in Bohr's writings).Then, I connect it with the epistemological pragmatism of the philosopher Richard Rorty.My aim is to reinterpret some issues of this quantum description that concern the category of objectivity from the Rortian perspective in a plausible way.This allows me to connect in a positive and a negative sense some quantum (and Bohrian) assumptions to the Rortian perspective, but mainly, it allows to reconsider the framework of scientific objects from the modern perspective to a new pragmatist and anti-essentialist point of view.
This article considers the concepts of reality, observer, and complementarity in Pauli and Bohr, and the similarities and, especially, differences in their understanding of these concepts, differences defined most essentially by their respective views of the role of the human observer in quantum measurement. These differences are significant even in the case of their respective interpretations of quantum phenomena and quantum mechanics, where the influence of Bohr's ideas on Pauli's understanding of quantum physics is particularly strong. They become especially strong and even radical in the case of their overall philosophical visions, where the impact of Jungean psychology, coupled to that of the earlier archetypal thinking of such figures as Kepler and Fludd, drives Pauli's thinking ever further away from that of Bohr.
The objective of this article is to demonstrate how the historical debate between materialism and idealism, in the field of Philosophy, extends, in new clothes, to the field of Quantum Physics characterized by realism and anti-realism. For this, we opted for a debate, also historical, between the realism of Albert Einstein, for whom reality exists regardless of the existence of the knowing subject, and Niels Bohr, for whom we do not have access to the ultimate reality of the matter, unless conditioning it to the existence of an observer endowed with rationality, position adopted in the Interpretation of Complementarity (1927) – posture that was expanded in 1935 when Bohr assumed a “relationalist” conception, according to which the quantum state is defined by the relationship between the quantum object and the entire measuring device. This is an extremely important debate, as it further consolidates the results of nascent Quantum Mechanics, guaranteeing Bohr the leadership of the orthodoxy based on the interpretation of complementarity. Here, when dealing with Quantum Theory, we will not make any distinction between the terms Quantum Physics, Quantum Theory or Quantum Mechanics. The entire discussion will be held under the name “Quantum Theory”. Theory that tries to analyze and describe the behavior of physical systems of reduced dimensions, close to the sizes of molecules, atoms and subatomic particles. We hope that the reader will appreciate the genius of these two titans in this field of Physics when they magnificently formulate the arguments that support the object of their defenses.
The objective of this article is to demonstrate how the historical debate between materialism and idealism, in the field of Philosophy, extends, in new clothes, to the field of Quantum Physics characterized by realism and anti-realism. For this, we opted for a debate, also historical, between the realism of Albert Einstein, for whom reality exists regardless of the existence of the knowing subject, and Niels Bohr, for whom we do not have access to the ultimate reality of the matter, unless conditioning it to the existence of an observer endowed with rationality, position adopted in the Interpretation of Complementarity (1927) – posture that was expanded in 1935 when Bohr assumed a “relationalist” conception, according to which the quantum state is defined by the relationship between the quantum object and the entire measuring device. This is an extremely important debate, as it further consolidates the results of nascent Quantum Mechanics, guaranteeing Bohr the leadership of the orthodoxy based on the interpretation of complementarity. Here, when dealing with Quantum Theory, we will not make any distinction between the terms Quantum Physics, Quantum Theory or Quantum Mechanics. The entire discussion will be held under the name “Quantum Theory”. Theory that tries to analyze and describe the behavior of physical systems of reduced dimensions, close to the sizes of molecules, atoms and subatomic particles. We hope that the reader will appreciate the genius of these two titans in this field of Physics when they magnificently formulate the arguments that support the object of their defenses.