The article continues the research on the phenomenon of the present time in the work of K.F. von Weizsäcker “The Construction of Physics”. Weizsäcker considers the phenomenon of time based on its phenomenological and specific quantum mechanical description. This work deals to a greater extent with the last aspect of the description of time. Based on a scrupulous analysis of mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics (QM), Weizsäcker states that time is such a paradoxical structure, which escapes clear definitions, that it can be “expressed only in the form of negations”. He is led to this conclusion by the analysis of time as a real parameter which reduces to point time, that is, when we begin to consider zero-time intervals. The general formalism of QM forces us to abandon such ideas. Considering that all the concepts of QM relate to the concept of probability, and the concept of fact with the concept of double probability p (a, b), Weizsäcker makes a far-reaching conclusion: some act of the present (a), “fact”, turns out to be only a possibility in the future of some class of events (b) that document this fact. In this kind of process, one can see how “the future affects the past”. Experiments have been conducted to confirm this phenomenon. We are talking about experiments with a “quantum eraser”. Within this approach, events are considered as reversible, which can be eliminated under certain conditions. Based on the phenomenological understanding, Weizsäcker formulates the concept of “the encompassing present”, which already includes the past, the present, and the future. From here, he formulates his main conclusion that a genuine event exists only in the all-encompassing present.
The article continues the research on the phenomenon of the present time in the work of K.F. von Weizsäcker “The Construction of Physics”. Weizsäcker considers the phenomenon of time based on its phenomenological and specific quantum mechanical description. This work deals to a greater extent with the last aspect of the description of time. Based on a scrupulous analysis of mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics (QM), Weizsäcker states that time is such a paradoxical structure, which escapes clear definitions, that it can be “expressed only in the form of negations”. He is led to this conclusion by the analysis of time as a real parameter which reduces to point time, that is, when we begin to consider zero-time intervals. The general formalism of QM forces us to abandon such ideas. Considering that all the concepts of QM relate to the concept of probability, and the concept of fact with the concept of double probability p (a, b), Weizsäcker makes a far-reaching conclusion: some act of the present (a), “fact”, turns out to be only a possibility in the future of some class of events (b) that document this fact. In this kind of process, one can see how “the future affects the past”. Experiments have been conducted to confirm this phenomenon. We are talking about experiments with a “quantum eraser”. Within this approach, events are considered as reversible, which can be eliminated under certain conditions. Based on the phenomenological understanding, Weizsäcker formulates the concept of “the encompassing present”, which already includes the past, the present, and the future. From here, he formulates his main conclusion that a genuine event exists only in the all-encompassing present.
The article is devoted to the problem of time in modern science, where in recent years there have been major changes related to the latest discoveries in the field of the foundations of quantum theory. The author refers to works of K.-F. von Weizsacker (which works are not well-known in Russian-speaking field). Weizsacker deploys a large-scale program of building modern physics, while starting (not only as a physicist, but also a professional philosopher) with questions of philosophical interpretation of postulates of modern physics, especially quantum mechanics. His key thesis is that time in physics is fundamentally distinct, which represents the whole physics as an integral scientific discipline. Weizsacker comes from physical and philosophical reflections, that give a special value to his work. Analyzing the conclusions of theoretical physics, namely the issues of substantiation of statistical mechanics, thermodynamics, and, above all, quantum mechanics, Weizsacker comes to the key idea of the structure of time in the substantiation of physical theory. The author in this conclusion disagrees with the opinion of most modern physicists that time has a subjective character, and the modus of the past, present and future reflects its essential character. The allocation of the time structure requires special logic. Such a logic is temporal and quantum. Starting from temporal logic, introducing the concept of possibility and probability, he comes to the substantiation of quantum mechanics. Being modal logic, it is based on the concept of possibility and probability. Key concept for Weizsacker is a binary alternative (Uralternative), closely related to the principle of superposition in quantum mechanics. By introducing the concept of certain alternatives, essentially actualized alternatives, Weizsacker shows how one can get the theory of relativity with its space-time structure. Further, he shows that based on its structure, you can get the theory of relativity. The space-time structure in this case is secondary, relational, as understood by Leibniz, Mach, and Einstein.
Although time is one of our most intuitive physical concepts, its understanding at the fundamental level is still an open question in physics. For instance, time in quantum mechanics and general relativity are two distinct and incompatible entities. While relativity deals with events (points in spacetime), with time being observer dependent and dynamical, quantum mechanics describes physical systems by treating time as an independent parameter. To resolve this conflict, in this work, we extend the classical concept of an event to the quantum domain by defining an event as a transfer of information between physical systems. Then, by describing the universe from the perspective of a certain observer, we introduce quantum states of events with space-time-symmetric wave functions that predict the joint probability distribution of a measurement (observation) at $(t,\stackrel{P\vec}{x})$. Under these circumstances, without assuming collapse, we propose that a well-defined instant of time, like any other observable, arises from a single event, thus being an observer-dependent property. In this manner, we obtain a stationary quantum state written as a sum of a sequence of normalized states of events with increasing memories. As a consequence, a counterfactual asymmetry along this sequence of events gives rise to the flow of time as being successive ``snapshots'' from the observer's perspective. In this proposal, which contrasts strikingly to the view in which time is an illusion, it is the many distinguishable states in which the observer stores information that makes the existence of time possible.
The aim of the article is to analyze the ontological foundations of quantum mechanics and the relationship of various interpretations of quantum mechanics with the question of truth in scientific knowledge. The theoretical material (various interpretations of quantum mechanics) was analyzed. The research methods were analysis, comparative-historical and institutional approaches. On the basis of the study, it can be concluded that physicists are only able to predict the probabilities of physical phenomena or processes, without any knowledge of the structure of entity in itself. The study helps to complement the theoretical picture of the ontology of quantum mechanics and to get an idea about the development prospects of the methodology of physical sciences. We should not ascribe properties that are unobservable in experience to the entity because science can truly interpret only the representation of entity in itself in experience and the ways of dealing with it, not future events or possible states of the entity. Otherwise, science “slides” down to the level of dialectical (rhetorical) exercises based not on true premises, but on generally accepted or “authoritative” biases, which gives room to extreme forms of relativism and takes natural scientists away from studying nature to inventing empirically unsupported hypotheses. When, in accordance with the Cartesian ontology, the scientist assumes that the entity is as the “subject” observes it (that is, the “reflection” of the entity in consciousness is identified with entity in itself), this assumption leads the scientist to attempts to “scientifically” describe the future events or the possible states of the entity. The criterion for the truth of a scientific theory put forward by Einstein in his dispute with Bohr remains a fundamentally unattainable ideal. Cognition of nature is probabilistically and fundamentally incomplete since a person can consciously comprehend natural phenomena only within the framework of their representation in the existing being. The probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics is due to the impossibility of knowing things as they exist by themselves, that is, as they exist outside of representation in the mind of the observer. This does not mean that physical entities did not exist before their knowledge: they existed potentially, but were not valid for the observer, that is, conscious. Quantum physics is as incomplete as any other physical theory when compared with an unattainable ideal, but this fact does not negate its truth for modern scientists since quantum theory is based on the results of verified experiments.
We have an uncertain future continuously coming into existence relative to the instant absorption and emission of photon energy. The future is a blank canvas that we can interact with forming the possible into the actual. And the future we are dealing with is from our point of reference. The future is unfolding with each photonelectron interaction with the respective elements of the periodic table and the individual waves formed by the electromagnetic spectrum. It’s a process of energy exchange that forms reality. If we look at the quantum world, the ‘past’ is represented by anti-matter annihilation which maintains a balance between matter and anti-matter showing a balance between the future and the past. In the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment, time is unfolding photon by photon within the experiment, within our frame of reference. But we have an infinite number of reference frames coming in and out of existence with a timeline for each object. What is our past might be the future to an observer from a different frame of reference. Everything is relative.
This paper is devoted to the key ideas of K. F. von Weizsäcker. His book “Aufbau der Physik”, which is dedicated to building a unified physical theory, is in the focus. Confirming that quantum mechanics is a universal physical theory, Weizsäcker is looking for ways to construct it. Based on the logic of temporary statements, introducing the concept of the Uralternative, Weizsäcker comes to the construction of quantum theory. He shows that on its basis the theory of relativity can be obtained, the structure of space with a relational character can be deduced.
While quantum mechanics has proven successful in its calculations and predictions, a debate persists regarding its understanding. This chapter considers the fundamental concepts of phenomenology and its connection to early quantum mechanics, including the exploration of quantum mechanics by F. London & E. Bauer using phenomenology. Phenomenological investigations of quantum mechanics in recent years have evolved. For instance, the informational interpretation of quantum mechanics, introduced by C. Rovelli in 1996 and advanced by Fuchs and C. M. Caves, offers a new perspective on quantum mechanics and possesses phenomenological tendencies which provide new insights into the problem of quantum measurement. Interestingly, phenomenology has its strong ties to hermeneutics. Therefore, this chapter sheds new light on quantum mechanics via hermeneutical analyses, and bridges the gap between the humanities and the natural sciences. In hermeneutics, interpretation encompasses two key aspects: Erklärung (Explanation) and Auslegung (Explication), where the former establishes clear and objective descriptions, similar to the “shuo ming” (说明) concept in Chinese, and the latter unveils deeper meanings and context, similar to the “chan shi” (阐释) concept in Chinese. The iterative process of explanation and explication plays a crucial role in the development of quantum mechanics. Hermeneutics allows us to view quantum matter with a new perspective, and new features are revealed such as “fusion of horizons” and “history of effects”, where the former is the merging of observer and observed realities in the context of quantum mechanics, while the latter means that the past, present, and future of a quantum system influence its overall reality. For this reason, the photon’s past, in the delayed-choice experiment, becomes an unfinished entity, a superposition waiting to be defined by measurement. This measurement collapses the possibilities and merges the photon’s past and present realities into a single, unified “whole”.