Relationalism in metaphysics leads to indeterminism and non-locality in physics. This is widely thought to be a problem for relationalism, but here I argue that it is in fact a?virtue. More specifically, I distinguish two senses in which a physical theory can be indeterministic and non-local. Relationalism does imply indeterminism and non-locality in one sense, but this is a virtue since indeterminism and non-locality in this sense is precisely what empirical observation confirms. There is a second sense of the terms on which indeterminism and non-locality would be a problem, but I argue that relationalism does not imply indeterminism or non-locality in that sense. With respect to indeterminism and non-locality, then, relationalism gets things exactly right. This defense of relationalism rests on distinguishing these two senses of indeterminism and non-locality. Since both terms are intimately connected to metaphysical possibility, this requires distinguishing two species of the latter. The distinction between two senses of metaphysical possibility I offer may be of interest to metaphysicians regardless of its bearing on relationalism, determinism, and locality.
Relationalism in metaphysics leads to indeterminism and non-locality in physics. This is widely thought to be a problem for relationalism, but here I argue that it is in fact a?virtue. More specifically, I distinguish two senses in which a physical theory can be indeterministic and non-local. Relationalism does imply indeterminism and non-locality in one sense, but this is a virtue since indeterminism and non-locality in this sense is precisely what empirical observation confirms. There is a second sense of the terms on which indeterminism and non-locality would be a problem, but I argue that relationalism does not imply indeterminism or non-locality in that sense. With respect to indeterminism and non-locality, then, relationalism gets things exactly right. This defense of relationalism rests on distinguishing these two senses of indeterminism and non-locality. Since both terms are intimately connected to metaphysical possibility, this requires distinguishing two species of the latter. The distinction between two senses of metaphysical possibility I offer may be of interest to metaphysicians regardless of its bearing on relationalism, determinism, and locality.
This book examines in detail two of the fundamental questions raised by quantum mechanics. Is the world indeterministic? Are there connections between spatially separated objects? In the first part of the book after outlining the formalism of quantum mechanics and introducing the measurement problem, the author examines several interpretations, focusing on how each proposes to solve the measurement problem and on how each treats probability. In the second part, the author argues that there can be non-trivial relationships between probability (specifically, determinism and indeterminism) and non-locality in an interpretation of quantum mechanics. The author then re-examines some of the interpretations of part one of the book in the light of this argument, and considers how they are with regard to locality and Lorentz invariance. One of the important lessons that comes out of this discussion is that any examination of locality, and of the relationship between quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity, should be undertaken in the context of a detailed interpretation of quantum mechanics. The book will appeal to anyone with an interest in the interpretation of quantum mechanics, including researchers in the philosophy of physics and theoretical physics, as well as graduate students in those fields.
This chapter discusses the conceptual relationship between determinism and locality, particularly in the context of quantum mechanics (QM). It first examines the connection between determinism and locality in abstract terms, and then in the context of QM. It then considers four possible combinations of locality and determinism: locality and determinism, nonlocality and determinism, locality and indeterminism, and nonlocality and indeterminism. It also explains how determinism and locality are linked to a central tenet of QM—the Heisenberg uncertainty relations. Three approaches that link uncertainty and nonlocality are explored: the first two, attributed to Erwin Schrödinger and I. Pitowsky, argue from the uncertainty relations to entanglement; the second, following S. Popescu and D. Rohrlich, from entanglement to the uncertainty relations. The chapter argues that determinism and locality are independent concepts but can offset each other under certain conditions, so that violation of the one permits satisfaction of the other.
The received view in foundations and philosophy of physics holds that if we reject supplementing quantum theory (QT) with certain hidden variables and consider that unitary QT is correct and universal, we should adopt a relationalist interpretation of QT. Relationalist interpretations relativize measurement outcomes to, for example, worlds, systems, agents, or reference frames. It includes the Many-Worlds Interpretation, Relational Quantum Mechanics, and QBism. These interpretations have potential costs connected with their relationalism that make them unattractive. Thus, if there exists a non-relational non-hidden variable universal intepretations of QT, it should be taken seriously. I will present an interpretation of this kind called Environmental Determinacy-based or EnD Quantum Theory (EnDQT), which goes beyond relationalism and the received view. EnDQT circumvents relationalism by constructing an account of indeterminate and determinate values and underlying quantum properties that is not relational while maintaining unitary non-hidden variable universal QT. In situations where a relationalist assumes that measurement outcomes are relativized, such as in the extended Wigner's friend scenarios, according to EnDQT there aren't determinate outcomes but systems with non-relational indeterminate values. In this approach, determinate values arose at some point in time through certain systems and persist due to them via certain interactions represented by certain networks. When there is isolation from the rest of the systems that belong to these networks, such as inside the friend's lab in the extended Wigner's friend scenarios, indeterminate values non-relationally arise inside. I will discuss other independent good reasons for adopting EnDQT, including providing a local causal explanation of Bell correlations and novel empirical posits represented by these networks.
Quantum physics, in contrast to classical physics, allows non-locality and indeterminism in nature. Moreover, the role of the observer seems indispensable in quantum physics. In fact, quantum physics, unlike classical physics, suggests a metaphysics that is not physicalism (which is today’s official metaphysical doctrine). As is well known, physicalism implies a reductive position in the philosophy of mind, specifically in its two core areas, the philosophy of consciousness and the philosophy of action. Quantum physics, in contrast, is compatible with psychological non-reductionism, and actually seems to support it. The essays in this book explore, from various points of view, the possibilities of basing a non-reductive philosophy of mind on quantum physics. In doing so, they not only engage with the ontological and epistemological aspects of the question but also with the neurophysiological ones.
Abstract This book develops a rigorous theory of indeterminism as a local and modal concept. Its crucial insight is that our world contains events or processes with alternative, really possible outcomes. The theory aims at clarifying what this assumption involves, and it does it in two ways. First, it provides a mathematically rigorous framework for local and modal indeterminism. Second, we support that theory by spelling out the philosophically relevant consequences of this formulation and by showing its fruitful applications in metaphysics. To this end, we offer a formal analysis of modal correlations and of causation, which is applicable in indeterministic and non-local contexts as well. We also propose a rigorous theory of objective single-case probabilities, intended to represent degrees of possibility. In a third step, we link our theory to current physics, investigating how local and modal indeterminism relates to issues in the foundations of physics, in particular, quantum non-locality and spatio-temporal relativity. The book also ventures into the philosophy of time, showing how the theory’s resources can be used to explicate the dynamic concept of the past, present, and future based on local indeterminism.
Classical physics is generally regarded as deterministic, as opposed to quantum mechanics that is considered the first theory to have introduced genuine indeterminism into physics. We challenge this view by arguing that the alleged determinism of classical physics relies on the tacit, metaphysical assumption that there exists an actual value of every physical quantity, with its infinite predetermined digits (which we name principle of infinite precision). Building on recent information-theoretic arguments showing that the principle of infinite precision (which translates into the attribution of a physical meaning to mathematical real numbers) leads to unphysical consequences, we consider possible alternative indeterministic interpretations of classical physics. We also link those to well-known interpretations of quantum mechanics. In particular, we propose a model of classical indeterminism based on finite information quantities (FIQs). Moreover, we discuss the perspectives that an indeterministic physics could open (such as strong emergence), as well as some potential problematic issues. Finally, we make evident that any indeterministic interpretation of physics would have to deal with the problem of explaining how the indeterminate values become determinate, a problem known in the context of quantum mechanics as (part of) the ``quantum measurement problem.'' We discuss some similarities between the classical and the quantum measurement problems, and propose ideas for possible solutions (e.g., ``collapse models'' and ``top-down causation'').