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

American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology

Choosing the right fictions of scientific law

D.O. Walter

Published Nov 1, 1980• 1 citation
Publisher

Abstract

Fictions are well established in the theory and practice of civil law; similar importance is here claimed for fictions in the theory and application of scientific law. A puzzle from quantum mechanics, previously referred to in this Journal [Am. J. Physiol. 238 (Regulatory Integrative Comp. Physiol. 7(: R277-R290, 1980], is reinterpreted by suggesting quantum logic as a source of relevant fictions, which indicate a solution to that puzzle. Another physiological application of quantum theory suggests that the concept of "the state of the brain" may, in its usual classical sense, not be useful for an individual brain--but may well be suggestively modeled by a quantum state. The notion of "myths," usually only pejoratively applied in positivistic writings, is suggested for rehabilitation, in view of their helpful function (often unnoticed) even in positivistic thinking. Finally, an example of a biological simulation (of a tumor by a cell culture) is presented, to show that its multilayered fictionalizations illustrate the surprising fact that a simulation that is insulated from the system being simulated can be logically more powerful than any uninsulated simulation.

DOI
10.1152/ajpregu.1980.239.5.r365

Related papers

Introduction

Bartosz W. Wojciechowski

Quantum physics is perhaps the most successful scientific achievement in the history of theoretical science. It was created to explain puzzling facts that could not be interpreted using classical physical theory, and it did so by proposing an entirely new set of revolutionary concepts. The earlier classical physical theory is currently regarded as a subset of the more general quantum theory. In the process of constructing quantum mechanics, physicists created a new theory of probabilistic and dynamic systems that is more general than the previous classic theory. This book is not about quantum physics – it focuses on the application of the probabilistic dynamic system generated by quantum theory to a new field: cognition and legal decision-making. Almost all prior cognitive and decision science modelling relied on assumptions derived from classical probability dynamic systems. However, these fields have also encountered peculiar findings that are inexplicable within this limited framework. Quantum notions may provide some solutions. In this book, we examine the reasons why and show how these concepts can be applied to the fields of cognition and legal decision-making.

Routledge eBooks•Aug 1, 2023•0 citations

What Bohr wanted Carnap to learn from quantum mechanics

Jan Faye, Rasmus Jaksland

Niels Bohr's interpretation of quantum mechanics is often cast as positivist and sometimes explicitly claimed to be influenced by logical positivists due to some similarities in their thinking. While it is certainly the case that some logical positivists attempted to recruit Bohr, this paper argues that Bohr had interests of his own in the logical positivists. Bohr's interpretation of quantum mechanics focuses on observation, the use of classical concepts in quantum mechanics, and indeterminacy of quantum processes as opposed to uncertainty of measurement. His view thereby shares some common ground with the logical positivists' views on verification, the observation language, and anti-metaphysics. But Bohr also emphasized complementarity: that certain pairs of concepts - such as position and momentum - are mutually exclusive in quantum mechanics since they, according to Bohr, are only meaningful relative to different experimental arrangements. Bohr believed that complementary brought a general epistemological lesson for all of science that an objective description of nature is not separable from the observational and experimental conditions under which we explore nature. Motivated by the common ground between himself and logical positivism, Bohr tried to persuade the logical positivists and Carnap in particular to adopt and champion complementarity as well as part of their unity of science program. Though his efforts ultimately proved in vain, Bohr's attempts to influence logical positivism disprove the claim that his engagement with them was reluctant and purposefully limited.

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A•Jun 17, 2021•23 citations

The ‘Logic’ of ‘Quantum Logic’

John J. Stachel

One can and often does use the word ‘logic’ in a variety of metaphorical ways, speaking of “the logic of the situation”, “the logic of events”, “the logic of history”, and so on. No harm is done, so long as one realizes that these usages are metaphorical, and should not be given any deeper significance – at least without extensive discussion of the meaning of the word ‘logic’ in these phrases. In this metaphorical sense, one may speak of “the logic of quantum mechanics”, just as one may speak of “the logic of modern art”, for example. But if we want to use the term ‘logic’ in a non-metaphorical sense – and I take it that this is the intent in all serious discussions of ‘quantum logic’–we are under some obligation to give an account of the significance to be given to the word ‘logic’ and to demonstrate that the proposed usage does not do violence to the several-thousand-year-old tradition in the field.

PSA Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association•Jan 1, 1974•1 citation

From Quantum Theory To Mind-Matter Interaction: Where's The Missing Link?

Navjot Singh Gadda

Overwhelming empirical evidence suggests that consciousness may be fundamentally linked to properties of physical systems. Quantum coherence in biological molecules, as well as entangled states of macroscopic objects such as brains, are important examples that support this notion. If we consider the quantum effects that seem most relevant to biology (e.g., coherence, entanglement, superposition), does it become feasible to identify general rules for observing biological function arising from processes associated with quantum mechanics? What implications would follow if a scientific theory were formulated to describe the interplay between brain functioning and quantum uncertainty? Such a framework will require additional postulates on the nature of quantum interactions in condensed phase systems. One challenge for present day theorists is whether and how classical and quantum mechanics may ultimately provide an integrated description of physics. This article will explore the issues related to quantum theory's ability to address mind-body phenomena and their connection to consciousness.

•Jun 2, 2022•3 citations

The Non-Reflexive Formulation of Quantum Mechanics: the Whys and the Hows

Décio Krause

In the non-reflexive formulation of quantum physics, attention is given to a metaphysical view of quantum objects (q-objects) as non-individuals, characterised as entities to which the standard notion of identity lacks sense. The reference to the nature of q-objects is usually omitted in other interpretations and the most we can find is some vague reference to “to each [quantum] system we associate a Hilbert space”, and nothing more is said about them; we need to infer from the theory their characteristics, and it gives us several alternatives. One of them, to be justified here in broad aspects, is the non-individual view. It is important to enlighten that we are not trying to just find a way to deal with quantum entities but to defend a possible ontology of non-individuals, which can be applied also to ‘particles’ arising from quantum fields. Our account is based on two assumptions: (i) the ‘classical theory of identity’ does not apply to q-objects, and (ii) their non-individuality must be attributed from the start, that is, as a primitive notion and not ‘made a posteriori’ say by assuming symmetry principles. The underlying logic is called non-reflexive because the reflexive law of identity \(\forall{x{({x = x})}}\) is supposed not to hold for q-objects. Since all the details demand a lot of space, here we only sketch and justify our view. The references provide a more detailed account.

Qeios•Mar 19, 2025•0 citations

Against "Reality" in Physics

S. P. Boughn

The concept of "reality" is often raised in the context of philosophical foundations of physics or interpretations of quantum mechanics. When this term is so raised, it is a warning to me that I am about to be led down a rabbit hole. Such diversions usually lead nowhere unless you consider endless discussions of Schrodinger's cat, wave function collapse, quantum non-locality, and parallel universes to be useful. A prime example is the famous Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen paper wherein they concluded that the quantum wave function cannot provide a complete description of physical reality. In this essay I suggest that, in physics discourse, the term "reality" should be avoided at all costs.

arXiv:1903.08673•Mar 20, 2019•1 citation
Fictions are well established in the theory and practice of civil law; similar importance is here claimed for fictions in the theory and application of scientific law. A puzzle from quantum mechanics, previously referred to in this Journal [Am. J. Physiol. 238 (Regulatory Integrative Comp. Physiol. 7(: R277-R290, 1980], is reinterpreted by suggesting quantum logic as a source of relevant fictions, which indicate a solution to that puzzle. Another physiological application of quantum theory suggests that the concept of "the state of the brain" may, in its usual classical sense, not be useful for an individual brain--but may well be suggestively modeled by a quantum state. The notion of "myths," usually only pejoratively applied in positivistic writings, is suggested for rehabilitation, in view of their helpful function (often unnoticed) even in positivistic thinking. Finally, an example of a biological simulation (of a tumor by a cell culture) is presented, to show that its multilayered fictionalizations illustrate the surprising fact that a simulation that is insulated from the system being simulated can be logically more powerful than any uninsulated simulation.
Quantum physics is perhaps the most successful scientific achievement in the history of theoretical science. It was created to explain puzzling facts that could not be interpreted using classical physical theory, and it did so by proposing an entirely new set of revolutionary concepts. The earlier classical physical theory is currently regarded as a subset of the more general quantum theory. In the process of constructing quantum mechanics, physicists created a new theory of probabilistic and dynamic systems that is more general than the previous classic theory. This book is not about quantum physics – it focuses on the application of the probabilistic dynamic system generated by quantum theory to a new field: cognition and legal decision-making. Almost all prior cognitive and decision science modelling relied on assumptions derived from classical probability dynamic systems. However, these fields have also encountered peculiar findings that are inexplicable within this limited framework. Quantum notions may provide some solutions. In this book, we examine the reasons why and show how these concepts can be applied to the fields of cognition and legal decision-making.
Niels Bohr's interpretation of quantum mechanics is often cast as positivist and sometimes explicitly claimed to be influenced by logical positivists due to some similarities in their thinking. While it is certainly the case that some logical positivists attempted to recruit Bohr, this paper argues that Bohr had interests of his own in the logical positivists. Bohr's interpretation of quantum mechanics focuses on observation, the use of classical concepts in quantum mechanics, and indeterminacy of quantum processes as opposed to uncertainty of measurement. His view thereby shares some common ground with the logical positivists' views on verification, the observation language, and anti-metaphysics. But Bohr also emphasized complementarity: that certain pairs of concepts - such as position and momentum - are mutually exclusive in quantum mechanics since they, according to Bohr, are only meaningful relative to different experimental arrangements. Bohr believed that complementary brought a general epistemological lesson for all of science that an objective description of nature is not separable from the observational and experimental conditions under which we explore nature. Motivated by the common ground between himself and logical positivism, Bohr tried to persuade the logical positivists and Carnap in particular to adopt and champion complementarity as well as part of their unity of science program. Though his efforts ultimately proved in vain, Bohr's attempts to influence logical positivism disprove the claim that his engagement with them was reluctant and purposefully limited.
One can and often does use the word ‘logic’ in a variety of metaphorical ways, speaking of “the logic of the situation”, “the logic of events”, “the logic of history”, and so on. No harm is done, so long as one realizes that these usages are metaphorical, and should not be given any deeper significance – at least without extensive discussion of the meaning of the word ‘logic’ in these phrases. In this metaphorical sense, one may speak of “the logic of quantum mechanics”, just as one may speak of “the logic of modern art”, for example. But if we want to use the term ‘logic’ in a non-metaphorical sense – and I take it that this is the intent in all serious discussions of ‘quantum logic’–we are under some obligation to give an account of the significance to be given to the word ‘logic’ and to demonstrate that the proposed usage does not do violence to the several-thousand-year-old tradition in the field.
Overwhelming empirical evidence suggests that consciousness may be fundamentally linked to properties of physical systems. Quantum coherence in biological molecules, as well as entangled states of macroscopic objects such as brains, are important examples that support this notion. If we consider the quantum effects that seem most relevant to biology (e.g., coherence, entanglement, superposition), does it become feasible to identify general rules for observing biological function arising from processes associated with quantum mechanics? What implications would follow if a scientific theory were formulated to describe the interplay between brain functioning and quantum uncertainty? Such a framework will require additional postulates on the nature of quantum interactions in condensed phase systems. One challenge for present day theorists is whether and how classical and quantum mechanics may ultimately provide an integrated description of physics. This article will explore the issues related to quantum theory's ability to address mind-body phenomena and their connection to consciousness.
In the non-reflexive formulation of quantum physics, attention is given to a metaphysical view of quantum objects (q-objects) as non-individuals, characterised as entities to which the standard notion of identity lacks sense. The reference to the nature of q-objects is usually omitted in other interpretations and the most we can find is some vague reference to “to each [quantum] system we associate a Hilbert space”, and nothing more is said about them; we need to infer from the theory their characteristics, and it gives us several alternatives. One of them, to be justified here in broad aspects, is the non-individual view. It is important to enlighten that we are not trying to just find a way to deal with quantum entities but to defend a possible ontology of non-individuals, which can be applied also to ‘particles’ arising from quantum fields. Our account is based on two assumptions: (i) the ‘classical theory of identity’ does not apply to q-objects, and (ii) their non-individuality must be attributed from the start, that is, as a primitive notion and not ‘made a posteriori’ say by assuming symmetry principles. The underlying logic is called non-reflexive because the reflexive law of identity ∀x(x=x)\forall{x{({x = x})}}∀x(x=x) is supposed not to hold for q-objects. Since all the details demand a lot of space, here we only sketch and justify our view. The references provide a more detailed account.
The concept of "reality" is often raised in the context of philosophical foundations of physics or interpretations of quantum mechanics. When this term is so raised, it is a warning to me that I am about to be led down a rabbit hole. Such diversions usually lead nowhere unless you consider endless discussions of Schrodinger's cat, wave function collapse, quantum non-locality, and parallel universes to be useful. A prime example is the famous Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen paper wherein they concluded that the quantum wave function cannot provide a complete description of physical reality. In this essay I suggest that, in physics discourse, the term "reality" should be avoided at all costs.