Complementarity and Paradox in Quantum Physics

Raymond Klibansky, Niels Henrik David Bohr

Martin Strauss

Wendell G. Holladay

To resolve the challenges (paradoxes) attending the genesis of quantum theory, Niels Bohr in 1927 proposed a generalization of the conceptual framework of classical physics, termed complementarity, which posited pairs of classical concepts that could be manifested only in mutually exclusive experimental arrangements with both needed to embrace the full range of physical experience. In this context particle–wave complementarity has encountered two major obstacles; (1) No formulation of it has commanded a general consensus; and (2) empirical evidence abounds that contradicts the claim of mutual exclusivity of particle and wave properties of quantum objects in a single experiment. These problems are rooted in the unrestricted scope of this claim. It is shown that a restricted version of particle–wave complementarity, here called “which value–interference” complementarity, is consistent with observations, is naturally contained in the mathematical formalism of quantum theory and, in fact, holds in any representation of quantum theory defined by the eigenvectors of a complete set of commuting observables, such as the configuration space position (kinematic) variables or the complementary linear momentum (dynamic) variables. Thus, the which value–interference form of particle–wave complementarity exists within kinematic–dynamic complementarity, a “layered” complementarity, so to speak. It is hoped that a consistent and valid exposition of particle–wave complementarity will be helpful to those who find the framework of complementarity useful and appropriate for some purpose.

Patrick A. Heelan

Applying Husserl's Eidetic Phenomenology to the transcendental structure (or "phenomenological reduction") of scientific data "given" in measurement to a first-person individual observer (the experimenter, S(1)) and a related third-person individual observer (the observer of the measurement process, S(3)), and comparing the outcomes, two paradoxical theses, "paradoxes of measurement," are derived. Thesis I: classical science necessarily entails "complementarity," "uncertainty relations," and the "entanglement" of observers and the data they observe. This situation is analogous in structure to that of quantum physics. Thesis II: a quantum object is a physical object with footprints in the perceptual world, but lacking a space-time "body"; it exists ontologically before the constitution of the perceptual world of the laboratory.

András Szántó

Neri, Davide

The relationship between reversible-dynamical and irreversible-thermodynamic descriptions is analyzed from a meta-theoretical point of view. A network of inter-theoretical relations is drawn by means of asymptotic relations and complementarity. It is argued that the "paradox" between micro-reversibility and macro-irreversibility can be overcome by assuming a meta-complementarity relation existing between different levels of physical description, preserving a realist conception.