The article discusses the new approaches to the four Zeno’s Paradoxes: “The Arrow”, “The Achilles”, “The Dichotomy” and “The Moving Rows”. Paradoxes are analyzed in relation to the current research in the field of elementary particle Physics and promising areas of the quantum theory of gravity development. Provided with the necessary philosophical interpretation Physics concepts are used to clarify Zeno’s Paradoxes and to search for answers to them. The involvement of modern approaches is shown to be ineffective in solving the paradoxes due to their scope losses when analyzed by the microworld Physics on ultra-small scales. The work’s main part is devoted to demonstrating this circumstance – the questions posed by paradoxes are deprived of the possibility of getting the answers (at least, in their classical interpretation). As a possible explanation stands the ground of mixing the properties of the macroworld and the microworld in the paradoxes statements (which is historically justified given the intuitive homogeneity of big and small, and the origin of non-classical Physics – quantum mechanics – only in the 20th century), meaning the transition from observation of the large physical objects to the infinitely small in terms of discreteness and continuity. However, the principles of space organization on ultra-small scales are beginning to be clarified in general terms only now, and, perhaps, these principles may turn out to be quite far from classical ideas on fundamental physical reality.
The article discusses the new approaches to the four Zeno’s Paradoxes: “The Arrow”, “The Achilles”, “The Dichotomy” and “The Moving Rows”. Paradoxes are analyzed in relation to the current research in the field of elementary particle Physics and promising areas of the quantum theory of gravity development. Provided with the necessary philosophical interpretation Physics concepts are used to clarify Zeno’s Paradoxes and to search for answers to them. The involvement of modern approaches is shown to be ineffective in solving the paradoxes due to their scope losses when analyzed by the microworld Physics on ultra-small scales. The work’s main part is devoted to demonstrating this circumstance – the questions posed by paradoxes are deprived of the possibility of getting the answers (at least, in their classical interpretation). As a possible explanation stands the ground of mixing the properties of the macroworld and the microworld in the paradoxes statements (which is historically justified given the intuitive homogeneity of big and small, and the origin of non-classical Physics – quantum mechanics – only in the 20th century), meaning the transition from observation of the large physical objects to the infinitely small in terms of discreteness and continuity. However, the principles of space organization on ultra-small scales are beginning to be clarified in general terms only now, and, perhaps, these principles may turn out to be quite far from classical ideas on fundamental physical reality.
When the concept of Zero is analyzed, it is frequently related to another equally deep and complicated concept – Nothing. If in science, Zero is closely associated with mathematics, then Nothing is primarily related to the material world. The question of whether Nothing can be found in the real physical world is often discussed in relation to the vacuum which, at some point in the history of the development of physics, is thought about as an empty space. Nevertheless, theories of modern physics have demonstrated that even in a vacuum, when all the matter is evacuated from a certain region of space, and this region is isolated from ordinary fields – gravitation field, electromagnetic fields etc – there still remain physical fields called vacuum zero fluctuations that can not be removed in principle. These vacuum fields are properties of space. In this chapter I will analyze another physics theory – namely, Quantum Physics – and will consider its less discussed relations to the concept of Nothing. One of the very first Greek philosophers, Thales (624–548 BCE) from Miletus, declared that Something can not appear from Nothing and it can not disappear, turning into Nothing. This idea, in some aspects, was further developed by Zeno from Elea (495–430 BCE) when he created his paradoxes of motion. These paradoxes can be understood as an analysis of the possibility of infinite division of time and space intervals. When we come to Quantum Physics, the very first appearance of the idea of the smallest possible portion of energy, quantum, was stimulated by the analysis of the spectrum of radiation of heated body – black-body radiation. German physicist Max Planck (1858–1947) demonstrated in 1899 that if we assume that there exists a smallest portion of radiation energy that can not be further divided into smaller parts, we arrive at the description of spectrum of the black-body radiation that perfectly matches the observable reality. In contrast, if we assume that radiation energy can be divided an infinite number of times and there does not exist the smallest possible portion, we arrive at the radiation spectrum which is in a sharp contradiction with observable reality. This contradiction is so strong that it has acquired a special term – the ultraviolet catastrophe. Certain parallels in Zeno’s reasoning and approach used in Quantum Physics can clearly be seen and will be discussed. In the conclusion, I will briefly touch on a similar situation in another field of physics when at the other extreme, departure from the idea of the possibility of the infinitely large quantities, this time velocities of motion, gave birth to another theory of modern physics – Einstein’s theory of special relativity.
There is a very reason to consider that to solve Zeno's paradoxes is to propose the theory of mechanical world view. We believe that this is not only our opinion but also most philosophers' opinion. Recently, in order to justify Heisenberg`s uncertainty principle (cf. Rep. Math. Phys Vol. 29, No. 3, 1991) more firmly. we proposed the linguistic interpretation of quantum mechanics (called quantum and classical measurement theory), which was characterized as the metaphysical and linguistic turn of the Copenhagen interpretation. This turn from physics to language does not only extend quantum mechanicsto classical systems but also yield the (quantum and classical) mechanical world view (and therefore, establish the method of science). If it be so, we may assert that Zeno's paradoxes (Flying Arrow Paradox, Achilles and the tortoise, etc.) were already solved in measurement theory. The purpose of this paper is to examine this assertion.
During the pre-Socratic period, Parmenides created his radical idea of an eternal, unchanging, and motionless world. This was met with much doubt, contempt, and counterarguments that sought to disprove his statements claiming that the concept of past and future were false, and that both change and movement were impossible. Yet his student, Zeno, came after him and sought to further prove his teacher Parmenides' arguments, creating what are now talked about thousands of years later known as Zeno's paradoxes. This paper will specifically talk about Zeno's dichotomy paradox, claiming that movement cannot exist due to the inherent need to be capable of traversing between a theoretically infinite series of midpoints in order to reach one's destination. The infinite series of points can be overcome with the use of atomist theory to break it down into finite, indivisible points. However, the question then becomes how exactly do we move from one finite point to another? This issue can be addressed using superposition principle, a quantum theory that requires an object to be observed in order for its state to be known, and Planck time, the current smallest measurement of time. Yet even with Planck time being an incredibly small unit of time, our observation is still limited. By understanding movement as a phenomenon that occurs between these lapses of observation, the quantum particles that are resting in superposition are capable of moving from one finite point to another.
New insight on the principles of the quantum physics development is given. The quite different behavior of quantum microworld mechanical systems in comparison with classical mechanical macroworld systems is attributed to the drastical change of the role of the gravitation field on the dynamics of microworld mechanical systems, for which it seems to be vanishing in com- parison with the role of the gravitation field on the dynamics of macroworld mechanical systems, for which it is decisive. The conclusion on the status of the second main postulate of quantum mechanics is given. Its formulation in all textbooks has to be represented in the form of the proved statement, since the hypothesis of Schrödinger on the existence of the field scalar function, being to be observable quantity, just charge density, is strictly mathematically proved. It is shown, that the field scalar function, being to be the solution of the corresponding nonstationary in general case Schrödinger equation and being to be the function the only of coordinates and time, actually describes the state of the atomic system, more strictly its corpuscular aspect. The atomic system is considered from the positions of the field theory, that is, it is the association of elementary particles with corresponding fields. The given fields being to be the media for the particles’ propagation are responsible for the wave aspect in the characteristic of atomic systems. The wave aspect is described by the independent scalar wave-function which was also introduced in quantum physics by Schrödinger, althogh the given fact seems to be unknown to the wide circle of the readers. The second main postulate being to be mathematically strictly grounded in Schrödinger formulation of quantum nechanics, in the popular probabilistic form of quantum nechanics cannot be proved for the general case, although the probabilistic theatise, proposed by Born is true in a number of special cases, quite correctly indicated by Dirac. The possible ways of the development of quantum theory, based on clear understanding of the origin of corpuscular-wave dualism and based on the fundamental both now mathemtically grounded main postulates are analysed.
Beginning in 1900 with 1-iax Planck's hypothesis of quanta, physics has been embarked on a course which has raised serious questions about the true nature of physical reality, about the foundational assumptions and structures of science, and about the relationships between physical reality and physical theory. In particular, attempts to give a physical interpretation to quantum theory seem to result in "pictures" of nature which are paradoxical. A subatomic entity is described by the theory as exhibiting the properties and behavior of both particle-like phenomena and wavelike phenomena. Since it seems unreasonable that a single entity could be both a point-like mass and a wave spread out through a region of space, quantum theory would seem to be less than satisfactory or less than complete at the interpretational level. The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the underlying causes of this paradox. The dissertation proceeds by reviewing the development of quantum theory and the emergence of the paradox. Next, the problem of physical interpretation is examined and several of the more significant existing interpretations are discussed and analyzed. Finally, the foundations of science and the general structure of scientific theory are examined in a search for the origins of the paradox. As a result of these investigations and analyses, it is concluded that the paradoxical nature of the physical interpretation of quantum theory is the consequence of certain paradigms and preconceptualizations about physical reality which have been incorporated into the theory at the foundational level. These fundamental assU14ptions produce, within quantum theory, a forced marriage of the plenum and atomic views of physical reality. They also produce an ambiguity with respect to the nature of causality which is charaeteristic of the theory. These problems are reflected in the mathematical formalisms and physical concepts of the theory as well as in its metaphysical foundations. Lastly, methods of resoling the paradox are discussed. It is argued that a successful solution is possible, but that it would involve the creation of a new metaphor-an extension of the present language--which would lead science to a deeper, subquantum level in terms of which the present paradox would vanish.
Statistical classical mechanics and quantum mechanics are developed and well-known theories that represent a basis for modern physics. Statistical classical mechanics enable the derivation of the properties of large bodies by investigating the movements of small atoms and molecules which comprise these bodies using Newton's classical laws. Quantum mechanics defines the laws of movement of small particles at small atomic distances by considering them as probability waves. The laws of quantum mechanics are described by the Schrödinger equation. The laws of such movements are significantly different from the laws of movement of large bodies, such as planets or stones. The two described theories are well known and have been well studied. As these theories contain numerous paradoxes, many scientists doubt their internal consistencies. However, these paradoxes can be resolved within the framework of the existing physics without the introduction of new laws. To clarify the paper for the inexperienced reader, we include certain necessary basic concepts of statistical physics and quantum mechanics in this paper without the use of formulas. Exact formulas and explanations are included in the Appendices. The text is supplemented by illustrations to enhance the understanding of the paper. The paradoxes underlying thermodynamics and quantum mechanics are also discussed. The approaches to the solutions of these paradoxes are suggested. The first approach is dependent on the influence of the external observer (environment), which disrupts the correlations in the system. The second approach is based on the limits of the self-knowledge of the system for the case in which both the external observer and the environment are included in the considered system. The concepts of observable dynamics, ideal dynamics, and unpredictable dynamics are introduced. The phenomenon of complex (living) systems is contemplated from the point of view of these dynamics.