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

Institute of Physics eBooks

The scientific workshop

Robert P Crease

Published Mar 1, 2023• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Scientific inquiry takes place inside large organizational structures that can be thought of as a series of loosely connected ‘workshops,’ carefully supervised and regulated environments in which special things—quantum phenomena, for instance—can be made to show themselves for study and measurement. Each workshop involves ‘frames,’ or sets of assumptions and concepts that define the physical system under study. Philosophers inquire into workshop activity mainly through three general approaches.

DOI
10.1088/978-0-7503-2636-0ch1

Related papers

Philosophy of science and scientific controversy: a variety of physical conceptions and of philosophical interpretations of quantum physics

Olival Freire

Scientiae Studia•Dec 1, 2013•0 citations

Mysteries, Puzzles and Paradoxes in Quantum Mechanics

The fourth International Workshop on `Mysteries, Puzzles and Paradoxes in Quantum Mechanics' was held from 27 August to 1 September 2001, at the Palazzo Feltrinelli in Gargnano, Italy, as were the first three, on the shore of Lake Garda. It continued the tradition of the previous workshops in seeking a deeper understanding of the foundations of quantum mechanics. After more than 75 years, this field of investigation is still active and able to stimulate both intense discussions and interesting physics research, involving many physicists from quite different fields. For that reason, this special issue of Journal of Optics B: Quantum and Semiclassical Optics confronts many different aspects of quantum mechanics, as afforded from many different points of view. There is, however, a common theme pervading all the contributions, which provided the main focus of this workshop, namely, interference. We have followed Richard Feynman, according to whom quantum interference is a `phenomenon which is impossible, absolutely impossible, to explain in any classical way, and which has in it the heart of quantum mechanics. In reality it contains the only mystery.' The workshop investigated many aspects of interference phenomena in various fields of optical, atomic and molecular physics. The progressive degradation of interference effects, i.e. quantum decoherence, was also investigated in its various forms, both experimentally and theoretically. In fact, this special issue demonstrates another distinguishing feature of the series of `Mysteries, Puzzles and Paradoxes in Quantum Mechanics', namely, the close connection between theoretical and experimental contributions. This strong interconnection is becoming more and more important nowadays, because of the impressive technological advances which have made it possible to verify experimentally in a laboratory what the founding fathers of quantum mechanics considered only as `Gedanken' experiments. The intense debate and lively atmosphere of the workshop is reflected by the 44 contributions to this special issue, involving more than 90 authors. We would like to give special thanks to Giovanna La Pietra, the real cornerstone of all four of the workshops; without her continuous assistance, they would have not been possible. Finally, special thanks are due to the Scientific Secretary of the workshop, Dr Stefano Olivares, for his invaluable help, both in organizing the meeting and in the preparation of this special issue. Rodolfo Bonifacio Università di Milano, Italy David Vitali Università di Camerino, Italy Guest Editors

Journal of Optics B Quantum and Semiclassical Optics•Jun 8, 2002•49 citations

Epistemological Problems of Statistical Character of Quantum Mechanics

Yan Meng-we

The epistemological problems related to the statistical character of quantum theory are mainly about the relation between subjectivity and objectivity in the observation process,and the localization of physics-language.A great contribution to epistemology,made by quantum mechanics,is to breach the intuitional conception by which phenomena is regarded as a thing belonging to the thing itself.Phenomena and law both is not the thing in itself.The thing what we can know and grasp are event and its move regulation which take place in the interaction between objectivities within practical field.Comparing with the Experiential Horizon of Husserl who had the experiential horizon localized to the scope of pure consciousness,the practical field is the field of sensible activities and the sensible world that exceed the pure consciousness.

Kexue jishu zhexue yanjiu•Jan 1, 2007•0 citations

‘Quantum Mechanics’ and ‘Scientific Explanation’ An Explanatory Strategy Aiming at Providing ‘Understanding’

Pandora Hadzidaki

Science & Education•Sep 12, 2006•18 citations

Complementarity and Deconstruction: Plotnitsky's Analysis and Beyond

Makoto Katsumori

Complementarity and Deconstruction: Plotnitsky's Analysis and Beyond Makoto Katsumori Akita University The philosophical thought of the modern physicist Niels Bohr (1885–1962), which revolves around the concept of complementarity, has long been a major subject of historical and philosophical inquiry. Many prior studies of Bohr's complementarity, however, seem to be limited by the fact that they largely proceed within the conceptual frames of the "mainstream" philosophy of science. This being the case, his radical questioning of traditional scientific and philosophical notions—such as the unambiguity of concepts and words—has not been adequately addressed, insofar as these notions are uncritically presupposed by the commentators themselves. In other words, Bohr's thought has often been interpreted under certain tacit premises of scientific rationality that are precisely of the kind targeted by his epistemological critique. In recent years, however, there have emerged new approaches to Bohr's idea of complementarity that place it in different, less conventional, philosophical contexts. Among the most notable of these is Arkady Plotnitsky's endeavor to connect Bohr's complementarity with Jacques Derrida's project of deconstruction. In the present article, based on my recent doctoral dissertation,1 I take up this contribution by Plotnitsky as a suitable point of reference from which to [End Page 435] explore anew Bohr's thought with its radical philosophical implications. After outlining Bohr's complementarity argument and Plotnitsky's reading thereof (in the first and second sections, respectively), I will examine a series of problems that seem to face, or to be left unsolved by, Plotnitsky's account (in the third section). This critical appraisal will finally lead me to sketch a new interpretive approach of my own (in the fourth section), which both extends and delimits the intersections between complementarity and deconstruction. As regards the historical development of Bohr's complementarity, I will largely restrict myself to the period between 1927 and 1950, in which the most crucial of his innovative ideas seem to have been presented. I. Bohr's Idea of Complementarity In his 1927 lecture delivered in Como, Italy, entitled "The Quantum Postulate and the Recent Development of Atomic Theory," Niels Bohr introduced the concept and framework of complementarity as a pivotal idea in his interpretation of quantum theory. From then on, he continually developed the idea of complementarity with regard not only to quantum theory but to other fields of knowledge as well. In what follows, I will first outline his complementarity argument in its "early" period, stretching from 1927 to the mid-thirties,—or, more precisely, until just before his 1935 debate with EPR.2 Bohr starts by noting that "our usual description of physical phenomena is based entirely on the idea that the phenomena concerned may be observed without disturbing them appreciably."3 This notion of physical phenomena as undisturbed by observation underlies all of classical physics and is still maintained in the theory of relativity. However, Bohr continues, a new situation has arisen with the development of quantum theory, specifically with "the so-called quantum postulate, which attributes to any atomic process an essential discontinuity, or rather individuality, completely foreign to the classical theories"; this "individuality" implies that "any observation of atomic phenomena will involve an interaction with the [End Page 436] agency of observation not to be neglected" (PWNB, 1: 53–54.). In more specific terms, any observation aimed at space-time coordination brings about an exchange of momentum and energy with the measuring rods and clocks. It is crucial here that this interaction between the object and the instrument of observation is not simply unavoidable, but "uncontrollable," which represents a "feature of irrationality" brought into the description of nature (PWNB, 1: 68, 91). For insofar as the measuring instruments are to fulfill their purpose, the interaction itself cannot be taken into account, and thus the magnitude of the disturbance always remains unknown. It follows, in Bohr's view, that "an independent reality in the ordinary physical sense can neither be ascribed to the phenomena nor to the agencies of observation...

Configurations•Sep 1, 2004•0 citations

Introduction

Steven French, Juha T. Saatsi

This chapter previews the contributions to this volume and lays out the broader context and motivations for engaging in the scientific realism debate specifically in relation to quantum physics.

Oxford University Press eBooks•Feb 27, 2020•1 citation
Scientific inquiry takes place inside large organizational structures that can be thought of as a series of loosely connected ‘workshops,’ carefully supervised and regulated environments in which special things—quantum phenomena, for instance—can be made to show themselves for study and measurement. Each workshop involves ‘frames,’ or sets of assumptions and concepts that define the physical system under study. Philosophers inquire into workshop activity mainly through three general approaches.
The fourth International Workshop on `Mysteries, Puzzles and Paradoxes in Quantum Mechanics' was held from 27 August to 1 September 2001, at the Palazzo Feltrinelli in Gargnano, Italy, as were the first three, on the shore of Lake Garda. It continued the tradition of the previous workshops in seeking a deeper understanding of the foundations of quantum mechanics. After more than 75 years, this field of investigation is still active and able to stimulate both intense discussions and interesting physics research, involving many physicists from quite different fields. For that reason, this special issue of Journal of Optics B: Quantum and Semiclassical Optics confronts many different aspects of quantum mechanics, as afforded from many different points of view. There is, however, a common theme pervading all the contributions, which provided the main focus of this workshop, namely, interference. We have followed Richard Feynman, according to whom quantum interference is a `phenomenon which is impossible, absolutely impossible, to explain in any classical way, and which has in it the heart of quantum mechanics. In reality it contains the only mystery.' The workshop investigated many aspects of interference phenomena in various fields of optical, atomic and molecular physics. The progressive degradation of interference effects, i.e. quantum decoherence, was also investigated in its various forms, both experimentally and theoretically. In fact, this special issue demonstrates another distinguishing feature of the series of `Mysteries, Puzzles and Paradoxes in Quantum Mechanics', namely, the close connection between theoretical and experimental contributions. This strong interconnection is becoming more and more important nowadays, because of the impressive technological advances which have made it possible to verify experimentally in a laboratory what the founding fathers of quantum mechanics considered only as `Gedanken' experiments. The intense debate and lively atmosphere of the workshop is reflected by the 44 contributions to this special issue, involving more than 90 authors. We would like to give special thanks to Giovanna La Pietra, the real cornerstone of all four of the workshops; without her continuous assistance, they would have not been possible. Finally, special thanks are due to the Scientific Secretary of the workshop, Dr Stefano Olivares, for his invaluable help, both in organizing the meeting and in the preparation of this special issue. Rodolfo Bonifacio Università di Milano, Italy David Vitali Università di Camerino, Italy Guest Editors
The epistemological problems related to the statistical character of quantum theory are mainly about the relation between subjectivity and objectivity in the observation process,and the localization of physics-language.A great contribution to epistemology,made by quantum mechanics,is to breach the intuitional conception by which phenomena is regarded as a thing belonging to the thing itself.Phenomena and law both is not the thing in itself.The thing what we can know and grasp are event and its move regulation which take place in the interaction between objectivities within practical field.Comparing with the Experiential Horizon of Husserl who had the experiential horizon localized to the scope of pure consciousness,the practical field is the field of sensible activities and the sensible world that exceed the pure consciousness.
Complementarity and Deconstruction: Plotnitsky's Analysis and Beyond Makoto Katsumori Akita University The philosophical thought of the modern physicist Niels Bohr (1885–1962), which revolves around the concept of complementarity, has long been a major subject of historical and philosophical inquiry. Many prior studies of Bohr's complementarity, however, seem to be limited by the fact that they largely proceed within the conceptual frames of the "mainstream" philosophy of science. This being the case, his radical questioning of traditional scientific and philosophical notions—such as the unambiguity of concepts and words—has not been adequately addressed, insofar as these notions are uncritically presupposed by the commentators themselves. In other words, Bohr's thought has often been interpreted under certain tacit premises of scientific rationality that are precisely of the kind targeted by his epistemological critique. In recent years, however, there have emerged new approaches to Bohr's idea of complementarity that place it in different, less conventional, philosophical contexts. Among the most notable of these is Arkady Plotnitsky's endeavor to connect Bohr's complementarity with Jacques Derrida's project of deconstruction. In the present article, based on my recent doctoral dissertation,1 I take up this contribution by Plotnitsky as a suitable point of reference from which to [End Page 435] explore anew Bohr's thought with its radical philosophical implications. After outlining Bohr's complementarity argument and Plotnitsky's reading thereof (in the first and second sections, respectively), I will examine a series of problems that seem to face, or to be left unsolved by, Plotnitsky's account (in the third section). This critical appraisal will finally lead me to sketch a new interpretive approach of my own (in the fourth section), which both extends and delimits the intersections between complementarity and deconstruction. As regards the historical development of Bohr's complementarity, I will largely restrict myself to the period between 1927 and 1950, in which the most crucial of his innovative ideas seem to have been presented. I. Bohr's Idea of Complementarity In his 1927 lecture delivered in Como, Italy, entitled "The Quantum Postulate and the Recent Development of Atomic Theory," Niels Bohr introduced the concept and framework of complementarity as a pivotal idea in his interpretation of quantum theory. From then on, he continually developed the idea of complementarity with regard not only to quantum theory but to other fields of knowledge as well. In what follows, I will first outline his complementarity argument in its "early" period, stretching from 1927 to the mid-thirties,—or, more precisely, until just before his 1935 debate with EPR.2 Bohr starts by noting that "our usual description of physical phenomena is based entirely on the idea that the phenomena concerned may be observed without disturbing them appreciably."3 This notion of physical phenomena as undisturbed by observation underlies all of classical physics and is still maintained in the theory of relativity. However, Bohr continues, a new situation has arisen with the development of quantum theory, specifically with "the so-called quantum postulate, which attributes to any atomic process an essential discontinuity, or rather individuality, completely foreign to the classical theories"; this "individuality" implies that "any observation of atomic phenomena will involve an interaction with the [End Page 436] agency of observation not to be neglected" (PWNB, 1: 53–54.). In more specific terms, any observation aimed at space-time coordination brings about an exchange of momentum and energy with the measuring rods and clocks. It is crucial here that this interaction between the object and the instrument of observation is not simply unavoidable, but "uncontrollable," which represents a "feature of irrationality" brought into the description of nature (PWNB, 1: 68, 91). For insofar as the measuring instruments are to fulfill their purpose, the interaction itself cannot be taken into account, and thus the magnitude of the disturbance always remains unknown. It follows, in Bohr's view, that "an independent reality in the ordinary physical sense can neither be ascribed to the phenomena nor to the agencies of observation...