Abstract This paper is a transcript of the dialogue between Carlo Rovelli and Mike Jackson after Rovelli's delivery of the 2021 Annual Mike Jackson Lecture, hosted by the Centre for Systems Studies at the University of Hull. The dialogue covers a range of topics, including how Rovelli developed a sense of curiosity in his youth; the connection between his interests in science and politics; the pathology of disciplinary divisions in academia; the value of Bogdanov's transdisciplinarity; Rovelli's theory of quantum gravity; the notions of granularity, indeterminism and relationality underpinning quantum mechanics; the role of the observer; mistaken uses of quantum mechanics; relational and network views of the world; how the discipline of Physics is becoming more systemic; the concept of levels of analysis in relation to nature and human inquiry; and the future for humanity.
Abstract This paper is a transcript of the dialogue between Carlo Rovelli and Mike Jackson after Rovelli's delivery of the 2021 Annual Mike Jackson Lecture, hosted by the Centre for Systems Studies at the University of Hull. The dialogue covers a range of topics, including how Rovelli developed a sense of curiosity in his youth; the connection between his interests in science and politics; the pathology of disciplinary divisions in academia; the value of Bogdanov's transdisciplinarity; Rovelli's theory of quantum gravity; the notions of granularity, indeterminism and relationality underpinning quantum mechanics; the role of the observer; mistaken uses of quantum mechanics; relational and network views of the world; how the discipline of Physics is becoming more systemic; the concept of levels of analysis in relation to nature and human inquiry; and the future for humanity.
This review is dedicated to a critical analysis of C. Rovelli’s book Helgoland: The Strange and Beautiful Story of Quantum Physics. The author presents the history of the emergence of quantum mechanics, primarily focusing on Heisenberg’s matrix formalism and the advent of the Schrodinger equation, in an engaging and lucid manner. For the Russian reader, the book is of additional interest as it examines the polemic between V.I. Lenin and A.A. Bogdanov surrounding the former’s work, Materialism and Empirio-criticism. Rovelli himself aligns with Bogdanov’s position, which is connected to E. Mach’s relational philosophy. In his book, much like Mach, Rovelli rejects the mechanistic assumption of a reality based on objects moving in space and time. Building upon this relational approach, Rovelli unfolds his own radical framework for interpreting quantum theory. Furthermore, he espouses a position akin to Nāgārjuna’s concept of the “emptiness” (śūnyatā) of the intrinsic nature of things. The review also examines certain contradictions inherent in this approach from a physics perspective.
AbstractQuantum physics has overturned the classical view of the world by introducing probability, indeterminacy and the participation of the observer. It is not merely a scientific revolution, it reshapes causality, reality and knowledge, opening the way to an epistemology of relation. From Bohr to Rovelli, from Heisenberg to Morin, contemporary thought recognizes that reality no longer appears as an independent structure, but as a network of interactions. This relational conception of the world crosses the boundary between science and philosophy and invites us to rethink human responsibility in the production of knowledge. Knowledge thus becomes an act of co-creation, articulating scientific rigor, reflexivity and awareness of interconnectedness : a new humanism grounded in complexity and relation. Keywordsquantum mechanics, indeterminacy, causality, reality, observer, relation, epistemology, complexity, complementarity, entanglement, Bohr, Heisenberg, Rovelli, Morin, humanism, responsibility, knowledge, interaction, philosophy of science, ethics of knowledge
Abstract There is a surprising parallel between the conceptual step taken by the theoretical physicists who discovered quantum mechanics in the 1920s and the philosophical work of Alexander Bogdanov. Both were under the direct cultural influence of the ideas of Ernst Mach. Even more surprisingly, there are aspects of the current debate on the physical interpretation of the quantum formalism that closely mirror the Lenin‐Bogdanov debate, in particular on the confusion between subjectivity and relationality. It seems to me that the ideas of Alexander Bogdanov can still bring clarity and be fertile today when applied to open issues in the foundations of physics.
A century after its formulation, we discuss the multifaceted implications for education of the vast cultural connections that quantum mechanics (QM) has helped establish between physics and other disciplines. Drawing on the most recent research in QM education, we will address the epistemological paradigms that underpin our understanding of nature and the cultural significance of this theory for the intellectual development of students at various educational levels; always maintaining a careful focus on the fundamental educational challenge of teaching and learning about the nature of science through physics education.
The Orthodox interpretation of quantum mechanics, which followed the Copenhagen Interpretation but was enhanced by primarily Werner Heisenberg and John von Neumann into a fully developed theory, brought in, among others, the role of measurement, available choices and response of the quantum system.It is, more consistent and clear than other interpretations of quantum mechanics as it provides account of the interactions of observers with the external world.As such, the Orthodox interpretation does a lot more than just account for physical interactions in the atomic world, which was the original goal of quantum mechanics in the early part of the twentieth century.In this article we present several issues that may have been answered or need further development, such as measurement and observation, what is Nature and who the observer is.Extending Orthodox quantum mechanics, leading to universal non-dual Awareness may provide a consistent and integrated view of reality and is consistent with advances in mathematical theory.An issue of paramount importance is what are the philosophical underpinnings or ontological view of the quantum nature of the universe and the role of human minds, observations and choices.
Abstract Quantum physics is being positioned as a new archive for addressing major theoretical problems in the field of international relations. Two of the major proponents of engaging quantum thinking within international relations, James Der Derian and Alexander Wendt, have argued that quantum thinking offers the possibility of a major paradigm shift in the field. Before we determine quantum’s revolutionary potential, the persistent and most pressing question for me is how to position quantum thinking among other kinds of and claims to knowledge. I want to horizontalize where different kinds of knowledge sit within the renewed attention to quantum theory. Rather than just horizontalize or flatten ontology, I want to see what happens when we place scientific and philosophical inquiry in dialogue, and what that conversation does to the authority and value of quantum thinking for the social sciences. The article reconstructs the dialogue between the first generation of quantum physicists and the philosophers who informed them. Rather than make an explicit argument about the philosophical debt of physics, I argue that a broad and highly interdisciplinary set of questions drove both fields well beyond the specific areas of expertise of any of these thinkers. I believe this adventure of ideas followed by physicists, philosophers, and social theorists alike offers us a way forward as the complexity of our contemporary global challenges confront us now with the necessity to think well beyond our disciplinary expertise.