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

WORLD SCIENTIFIC eBooks

Quantum Physics and Human Language

James B. Hartle

Published Dec 9, 2020• 2 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1142/9789811216404_0009

Related papers

Quantum physics and language

Jean-Marc Lévy-Leblond

Physica B+C•Jul 1, 1988•25 citations

Quantum physics and human language

James B Hartle

Human languages employ constructions that tacitly assume specific properties of the limited range of phenomena they evolved to describe. These assumed properties are true features of that limited context, but may not be general or precise properties of all the physical situations allowed by fundamental physics. In brief, human languages contain `excess baggage' that must be qualified, discarded, or otherwise reformed to give a clear account in the context of fundamental physics of even the everyday phenomena that the languages evolved to describe. The surest route to clarity is to express the constructions of human languages in the language of fundamental physical theory, not the other way around. These ideas are illustrated by an analysis of the verb `to happen' and the word `reality' in special relativity and the modern quantum mechanics of closed systems.

arXiv:quant-ph/0610131•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical•Mar 7, 2007•25 citations

Quantum Physics and Human Language

Hartle, J B

Human languages employ constructions that tacitly assume specific properties of the limited range of phenomena they evolved to describe. These assumed properties are true features of that limited context, but may not be general or precise properties of all the physical situations allowed by fundamental physics. In brief, human languages contain `excess baggage' that must be qualified, discarded, or otherwise reformed to give a clear account in the context of fundamental physics of even the everyday phenomena that the languages evolved to describe. The surest route to clarity is to express the constructions of human languages in the language of fundamental physical theory, not the other way around. These ideas are illustrated by an analysis of the verb `to happen' and the word `reality' in special relativity and the modern quantum mechanics of closed systems.

•Oct 16, 2006•23 citations

Quantum Physics and Linguistics

Oxford University Press eBooks•Feb 21, 2013•18 citations

Quantum Mechanics for Language Understanding and Generation

José I. Abreu, Juan Pablo Consuegra‐Ayala, Isabel Espinosa-Zaragoza +12 more

•Oct 24, 2026•0 citations

Quantum Physics and Ordinary Language

T. Bergstein

This book deals with the interdependence of the phenomenological and conceptual levels of experience.This interdependence is most objectively demonstrated by the complementarity of quantum physics.When examining the basic function of ordinary language within quantum physics it is seen that complementarity is fundamental to human comprehension itself, particularly to the interaction of language and mind.

•Jan 1, 1972•5 citations
Human languages employ constructions that tacitly assume specific properties of the limited range of phenomena they evolved to describe. These assumed properties are true features of that limited context, but may not be general or precise properties of all the physical situations allowed by fundamental physics. In brief, human languages contain `excess baggage' that must be qualified, discarded, or otherwise reformed to give a clear account in the context of fundamental physics of even the everyday phenomena that the languages evolved to describe. The surest route to clarity is to express the constructions of human languages in the language of fundamental physical theory, not the other way around. These ideas are illustrated by an analysis of the verb `to happen' and the word `reality' in special relativity and the modern quantum mechanics of closed systems.
Human languages employ constructions that tacitly assume specific properties of the limited range of phenomena they evolved to describe. These assumed properties are true features of that limited context, but may not be general or precise properties of all the physical situations allowed by fundamental physics. In brief, human languages contain `excess baggage' that must be qualified, discarded, or otherwise reformed to give a clear account in the context of fundamental physics of even the everyday phenomena that the languages evolved to describe. The surest route to clarity is to express the constructions of human languages in the language of fundamental physical theory, not the other way around. These ideas are illustrated by an analysis of the verb `to happen' and the word `reality' in special relativity and the modern quantum mechanics of closed systems.