Zeilinger-Brukner's informational foundations of quantum theory, a theory based on Zeilinger's foundational principle for quantum mechanics that an elementary system carried one bit of information, explains seemingly unintuitive quantum behavior with simple theoretical framework. It is based on the notion that distinction between reality and information cannot be made, therefore they are the same. As the critics of informational foundations of quantum theory show, this antirealistic move captures the theory in tautology, where information only refers to itself, while the relationships outside the information with the help of which the nature of information would be defined are lost and the questions "Whose information? Information about what?" cannot be answered. The critic's solution is a return to realism, where the observer's effects on the information are neglected. We show that radical antirealism of informational foundations of quantum theory is not necessary and that the return to realism is not the only way forward. A comprehensive approach that exceeds mere realism and antirealism is also possible: we can consider both sources of the constraints on the information, those coming from the observer and those coming from the observed system/nature/reality. The information is always the observer's information about the observed. Such a comprehensive philosophical approach can still support the theoretical framework of informational foundations of quantum theory: If we take that one bit is the smallest amount of information in the form of which the observed reality can be grasped by the observer, we can say that an elementary system (grasped and defined as such by the observer) correlates to one bit of information. Our approach thus explains all the features of the quantum behavior explained by informational foundations of quantum theory: the wave function and its collapse, entanglement, complementarity and quantum randomness. However, it does so in a more comprehensive and intuitive way. The presented approach is close to Husserl's explanation of the relationship between reality and the knowledge we have about it, and to Bohr's personal explanation of quantum mechanics, the complexity of which has often been missed and simplified to mere antirealism. Our approach thus reconnects phenomenology with contemporary philosophy of science and introduces the comprehensive approach that exceeds mere realism and antirealism to the field of quantum theories with informational foundations, where such an approach has not been taken before. Quanta 2014; 3: 32–42.
Zeilinger-Brukner's informational foundations of quantum theory, a theory based on Zeilinger's foundational principle for quantum mechanics that an elementary system carried one bit of information, explains seemingly unintuitive quantum behavior with simple theoretical framework. It is based on the notion that distinction between reality and information cannot be made, therefore they are the same. As the critics of informational foundations of quantum theory show, this antirealistic move captures the theory in tautology, where information only refers to itself, while the relationships outside the information with the help of which the nature of information would be defined are lost and the questions "Whose information? Information about what?" cannot be answered. The critic's solution is a return to realism, where the observer's effects on the information are neglected. We show that radical antirealism of informational foundations of quantum theory is not necessary and that the return to realism is not the only way forward. A comprehensive approach that exceeds mere realism and antirealism is also possible: we can consider both sources of the constraints on the information, those coming from the observer and those coming from the observed system/nature/reality. The information is always the observer's information about the observed. Such a comprehensive philosophical approach can still support the theoretical framework of informational foundations of quantum theory: If we take that one bit is the smallest amount of information in the form of which the observed reality can be grasped by the observer, we can say that an elementary system (grasped and defined as such by the observer) correlates to one bit of information. Our approach thus explains all the features of the quantum behavior explained by informational foundations of quantum theory: the wave function and its collapse, entanglement, complementarity and quantum randomness. However, it does so in a more comprehensive and intuitive way. The presented approach is close to Husserl's explanation of the relationship between reality and the knowledge we have about it, and to Bohr's personal explanation of quantum mechanics, the complexity of which has often been missed and simplified to mere antirealism. Our approach thus reconnects phenomenology with contemporary philosophy of science and introduces the comprehensive approach that exceeds mere realism and antirealism to the field of quantum theories with informational foundations, where such an approach has not been taken before. Quanta 2014; 3: 32–42.
We argue that Anton Zeilinger's "foundational conceptual principle" for quantum mechanics according to which an elementary system carries one bit of information is an idealistic principle, which should be replaced by a realistic principle of contextuality. Specific properties of quantum systems are a consequence of impossibility to speak about them without reference to the tools of their observation (identification) and, consequently, context in which these tools are applied. In particular, the assumption of non-locality is not required to explain quantum correlation. Correlated quantum events are related with each other in a causal way. But this is not classical, but quantum causality expressed by an entangled wave function. This or that particular correlation does not arise in measurement; in measurement it is identified in context. In contrast to Zeilinger's proposed principle of quantization of information, the principle of contextuality explains it realistically.
The emergence of an objective reality in line with the laws of the microscopic world has been the focus of longstanding debates. Recent approaches seem to have reached a consensus at least with respect to one aspect, namely, that the encoding of information about a given observable in a physical degree freedom is a necessary condition for such an observable to become an element of the physical reality. Taking this as a fundamental premise and inspired by quantum information theory, here we build an axiomatization for quantum realism---a notion of realism compatible with quantum theory. Our strategy consists of listing some physically motivated principles able to characterize quantum realism in a ``metric'' independent manner. We introduce some criteria defining monotones and measures of realism and then search for potential candidates within some celebrated information theories---those induced by the von Neumann, R\'enyi, and Tsallis entropies. We explicitly construct some classes of entropic quantifiers, among which some are shown to satisfy all the proposed axioms and hence can be taken as faithful estimates for the degree of reality (or definiteness) of a given physical observable. Hopefully, our framework may offer a formal ground for further discussions on foundational aspects of quantum mechanics.
Niels Bohr, considered one of the fathers of quantum mechanics, formulated a complex interpretation \nof quantum mechanics that guided his understanding of quantum experiments. The contemporary dispute \nbetween realism and anti-realism, the two main approaches to the interpretation of quantum mechanics, \nis often based on different attitudes towards or even readings of Bohr. We propose that a better \nunderstanding of Bohr’s philosophical thought can contribute to the contemporary reconciliation of \nthese opposing philosophical views and thus to a better understanding of the quantum world. Unfortunately, \nin many contemporary interpretations, Bohr’s philosophical approach to quantum mechanics \nhas been misunderstood, re-interpreted or labelled as ambiguous. This is mostly due to the dispersion \nof Bohr’s complex and unique interpretation through different texts, never united in a single systematically \nconceptualized work. To comprehensively explain Bohr’s philosophical approach and his main \nphilosophical concepts, we consider the many similarities between Bohr’s and Husserl’s philosophical \napproach to science. Husserl developed his philosophical standpoint in a cultural context similar to \nBohr’s and shared Bohr’s objects of philosophical consideration as well as his approach to these objects. \nParallel reading of Bohr’s and Husserl’s texts reveals the closeness between Bohr’s ontological realism— \nepistemological anti-realism standpoint and Husserl’s phenomenological standpoint. This explains \ntheir similar views on the relationship between mathematical language, scientific method and Nature. \nWhile Bohr’s use of the term phenomenon is not equal to Husserl’s, Husserl’s rigorous philosophical \nexplanation of the term helps us to better understand Bohr’s use. Furthermore, the parallel reading \nfacilitates better understanding of one of Bohr’s main philosophical theses, often labelled as ambiguous \nand interpreted in different ways, that it is necessary to use classical concepts to describe quantum phenomena. \nWe claim that the thesis is connected with the advance of epistemological reconsideration of \nscience at the time of Bohr’s writing. Thus, Bohr considers some parts of argumentation as self-evident, \nwhile they are not evident to the contemporary reader. Husserl’s analysis of the relationship between science and the life-world offers a much-needed background for a comprehensive understanding of \nBohr’s thesis. The insight into the similarities between Bohr’s and Husserl’s philosophical approach \nto science and scientific phenomena enables a philosophically rigorous reading of Bohr’s texts; it can \neliminate some of the disagreements between realists and anti-realists and provide a firmer philosophical \nground for a dialog between them.
Several experiments have suggested that the complete indistinguishability of quantum systems is to be considered a real phenomenon. Experiments such as the HOM effect, the existence of BECs, the path identity cases, and many others are physical realities of today. Physicists `explain’ these phenomena using different models, such as Bohmian mechanics, relational quantum mechanics or the QBism approach. Most of these models are constructed within a standard mathematical framework, meaning standard mathematics, where all things can, even if only in principle, be distinguished from one another, so complete indistinguishability can only be mimicked. These approaches may work for physical purposes but are debatable regarding logical and metaphysical questions. If we accept that such questions are at least part of the philosophical aspect of quantum physics, then we are authorised to analyse them and try to offer an alternative. Looking for an alternative, we consider Alain Aspect’s and Anton Zeilinger’s views about quantum realism, opting for Aspect’s acceptance of some kind of reality behind the wave-function, while Zeilinger suggests that everything comes from information. In our opinion, the case is the opposite: it is information that comes from the existence of things. The aim of this paper is to justify why we think that the underlying reality (in Aspect’s sense) can be seen as a quantum ontology of non-individuals.
Scientific realism has traditionally maintained that our best scientific theories can be regarded as more or less true and as representing the world as it is (more or less). However, one of our very best current theories—quantum mechanics—has famously resisted such a realist construal, threatening to undermine the realist stance altogether. The chapters in this volume carefully examine this tension and the reasons behind it, including the underdetermination generated by the multiplicity of formulations and interpretations of quantum physics, each presenting a different way the world could be. Authors in this volume offer a range of alternative ways forward: some suggest new articulations of realism, limiting our commitments in one way or another; others attempt to articulate a ‘third way’ between traditional forms of realism and antirealism, or are critical of such attempts. Still others argue that quantum theory itself should be reconceptualised, or at least alternative formulations should be considered in the hope of evading the problems faced by realism. And some examine the nature of these issues when moving beyond quantum mechanics to quantum field theory. Taken together they offer an exciting new set of perspectives on one of the most fundamental questions in the philosophy of modern physics: how can one be a realist about quantum theory, and what does this realism amount to?
This thesis is a contribution to the debate on the implications of quantum information theory for the foundations of quantum mechanics. In Part 1, the logical and conceptual status of various notions of information is assessed. It is emphasized that the everyday notion of information is to be firmly distinguished from the technical notions arising in information theory; however it is maintained that in both settings `information' functions as an abstract noun, hence does not refer to a particular or substance (the worth of this point is illustrated in application to quantum teleportation). The claim that `Information is Physical' is assessed and argued to face a destructive dilemma. Accordingly, the slogan may not be understood as an ontological claim, but at best, as a methodological one. The reflections of Bruckner and Zeilinger (2001) and Deutsch and Hayden (2000) on the nature of information in quantum mechanics are critically assessed and some results presented on the characterization of entanglement in the Deutsch-Hayden formalism. Some philosophical aspects of quantum computation are discussed and general morals drawn concerning the nature of quantum information theory. In Part II, following some preliminary remarks, two particular information-theoretic approaches to the foundations of quantum mechanics are assessed in detail. It is argued that Zeilinger's (1999) Foundational Principle is unsuccessful as a foundational principle for quantum mechanics. The information-theoretic characterization theorem of Clifton, Bub and Halvorson (2003) is assessed more favourably, but the generality of the approach is questioned and it is argued that the implications of the theorem for the traditional foundational problems in quantum mechanics remains obscure.