In this work we discuss logical structures related to indistinguishable (or similar) particles. Most of the framework used to develop these structures was presented in previous works. We use these structures and constructions to discuss possible ontologies for identical particles. In other words, we use these structures in order to characterize the logical structure of quantum systems for the case of similar particles, and draw possible philosophical implications. We also review some proposals available in the literature which may be considered within the framework of the quantum logical tradition regarding the problem of indistinguishability. Besides these discussions and constructions, we advance novel technical results, namely, a latticetheoretical structure for identical particles for the finite dimensional case. This approach has not been present in the scarce literature on quantum logic and similar particles.
In this work we discuss logical structures related to indistinguishable (or similar) particles. Most of the framework used to develop these structures was presented in previous works. We use these structures and constructions to discuss possible ontologies for identical particles. In other words, we use these structures in order to characterize the logical structure of quantum systems for the case of similar particles, and draw possible philosophical implications. We also review some proposals available in the literature which may be considered within the framework of the quantum logical tradition regarding the problem of indistinguishability. Besides these discussions and constructions, we advance novel technical results, namely, a latticetheoretical structure for identical particles for the finite dimensional case. This approach has not been present in the scarce literature on quantum logic and similar particles.
In this work we discuss logical structures related to indistinguishable particles. Most of the framework used to develop these structures was presented in [17, 28] and in [20, 14, 15, 16]. We use these structures and constructions to discuss possible ontologies for identical parti-cles. In other words, we use these structures in order to characterize the logical structure of quantum systems for the case of indistinguishable particles, and draw possible philosoph-ical implications. We also review some proposals available in the literature which may be considered within the framework of the quantum logical tradition regarding the problem of indistinguishability. Besides these discussions and constructions, we advance novel technical results, namely, a lattice theoretical structure for identical particles for the finite dimensional case. This kind of approach was not present in the scarcely literature of quantum logic and indistinguishable particles.
The study of entanglement in systems composed of identical particles raises interesting challenges with far-reaching implications in both, our fundamental understanding of the physics of composite quantum systems, and our capability of exploiting quantum indistinguishability as a resource in quantum information theory. Impressive theoretical and experimental advances have been made in the last decades that bring us closer to a deeper comprehension and to a better control of entanglement. Yet, when it involves composites of indistinguishable quantum systems, the very meaning of entanglement, and hence its characterization, still finds controversy and lacks a widely accepted definition. The aim of the present paper is to introduce, within an accessible and self-contained exposition, the basic ideas behind one of the approaches advanced towards the construction of a coherent definition of entanglement in systems of indistinguishable particles, with focus on fermionic systems. We also inquire whether the corresponding tools developed for studying entanglement in identical-fermion systems can be exploited when analysing correlations in distinguishable-party systems, in which the complete information of the individual parts is not available. Further, we open the discussion on the broader problem of constructing a suitable framework that accommodates entanglement in the presence of generalized statistics. This article is part of the theme issue 'Identity, individuality and indistinguishability in physics and mathematics'.
In this work, we discuss a formal way of dealing with the properties of contextual systems. Our approach is to assume that properties describing the same physical quantity, but belonging to different measurement contexts, are indistinguishable in a strong sense. To construct the formal theoretical structure, we develop a description using quasi-set theory, which is a set-theoretical framework built to describe collections of elements that violate Leibnitz's principle of identity of indiscernibles. This framework allows us to consider a new ontology in order to study the properties of quantum systems. This article is part of the theme issue 'Contextuality and probability in quantum mechanics and beyond'.
In this work, we discuss a formal way of dealing with the properties of contextual systems. Our approach is to assume that properties describing the same physical quantity, but belonging to different measurement contexts, are indistinguishable in a strong sense. To construct the formal theoretical structure, we develop a description using quasi-set theory, which is a settheoretical framework built to describe collections of elements that violate Leibnitz’s principle of identity of indiscernibles. This framework allows us to consider a new ontology in order to study the properties of quantum systems. \nThis article is part of the theme issue ‘Contextuality and probability in quantum mechanics and beyond’.
According to classical physics particles are basic building blocks of the world. Classical particles are distinguishable objects, individuated by physical characteristics. By contrast, in quantum mechanics the standard view is that particles of the same kind ("identical particles") are in all circumstances indistinguishable from each other. This indistinguishability doctrine is motivated by the (anti)symmetrization postulates together with the assumption (``factorism'') that each single particle is represented in exactly one factor space in the tensor product Hilbert space of a many-particles system. Although the factorist assumption is standard in the literature, it is conceptually problematic. Particle indistinguishability is incompatible with the everyday meaning of ``particle'', and also with how this term is used both in classical physics and in the experimental practice of physics. The standard view requires quantum particles of the same kind to remain indistinguishable even in the classical limit, so that a transition to the classical picture of the world seems impossible. Earlier we have proposed an alternative conception of quantum particles that does not rely on factorism and that avoids these and other problems. We further explain and develop this proposal here. In our view, particles in quantum theory are not fundamental but \emph{emergent}. However, in those situations where the particle concept is applicable, quantum particles---identical or not---are distinguishable in the same way as classical particles.
Abstract In this basically expository paper we discuss the role oflogic and mathematics in researches concerning the ontology of scientific theories, and we consider the particular case of quantum mechanics. We argue that systems of logic in general, and classical logic in particular, may contribute substantially with the ontology of any theory that has this logic in its base. In the case of quantum mechanics, however, from the point of view of philosophical discussions conceming identity and individuality, those contributions may not be welcome for a specific interpretation, and an altemative system of logic perhaps could be used instead of a classical system. In this sense, we argue that the logic and ontology of a scientific theory may be seen as mutually inftuencing each other. On the one hand, logic contributes to shape the general features of the ontology of a theory; on the other hand, the theory also puts constraints on the possible understanding of ontology and, respectively, on possible systems of logic that may be the underlying logic ofthe theory.