The Wavefunction's Dilemma: Reality, Knowledge, and the Space In-Between

Harrigan and Spekkens give formal definitions for the wavefunction in quantum mechanics to be $\psi$ -ontic or $\psi$ -epistemic, such that the wavefunction can only be one or the other. We argue that nothing about the informal ideas of epistemic and ontic interpretations rules out wavefunctions representing both reality and knowledge. The implications of the Pusey-Barrett-Rudolph theorem and many other issues need to be rethought in the light of our analysis.Harrigan and Spekkens give formal definitions for the wavefunction in quantum mechanics to be $\psi$-ontic or $\psi$-epistemic, such that the wavefunction can only be one or the other. We argue that nothing about the informal ideas of epistemic and ontic interpretations rules out wavefunctions representing both reality and knowledge. The implications of the Pusey-Barrett-Rudolph theorem and many other issues need to be rethought in the light of our analysis.

Jan 16, 20214 citations

The wave function and reality, revisited

Allen C. Dotson

American Journal of PhysicsJun 14, 20050 citations

Could wavefunctions simultaneously represent knowledge and reality?

Jonte R. Hance, JG Rarity, J Ladyman

In discussion of the interpretation of quantum mechanics the terms ‘ontic’ and ‘epistemic’ are often used in the sense of pertaining to what exists, and pertaining to cognition or knowledge respectively. The terms are also often associated with the formal definitions given by Harrigan and Spekkens for the wavefunction in quantum mechanics to be �ψ-ontic or �ψ-epistemic in the context of the ontological models framework. The formal definitions are contradictories, so that the wavefunction can be either ψ�-epistemic or ψ �-ontic but not both. However, we argue, nothing about the informal ideas of epistemic and ontic interpretations rules out wavefunctions representing both reality and knowledge. The implications of the Pusey–Barrett–Rudolph theorem and many other issues may be rethought in the light of our analysis.In discussion of the interpretation of quantum mechanics the terms ‘ontic’ and ‘epistemic’ are often used in the sense of pertaining to what exists, and pertaining to cognition or knowledge respectively. The terms are also often associated with the formal definitions given by Harrigan and Spekkens for the wavefunction in quantum mechanics to be �ψ-ontic or �ψ-epistemic in the context of the ontological models framework. The formal definitions are contradictories, so that the wavefunction can be either ψ�-epistemic or ψ �-ontic but not both. However, we argue, nothing about the informal ideas of epistemic and ontic interpretations rules out wavefunctions representing both reality and knowledge. The implications of the Pusey–Barrett–Rudolph theorem and many other issues may be rethought in the light of our analysis.

Aug 1, 20220 citations

Could wavefunctions simultaneously represent knowledge and reality?

Jonte R. Hance, John Rarity, James Ladyman

Abstract In discussion of the interpretation of quantum mechanics the terms ‘ontic’ and ‘epistemic’ are often used in the sense of pertaining to what exists, and pertaining to cognition or knowledge respectively. The terms are also often associated with the formal definitions given by Harrigan and Spekkens for the wavefunction in quantum mechanics to be $\psi$ ψ -ontic or $\psi$ ψ -epistemic in the context of the ontological models framework. The formal definitions are contradictories, so that the wavefunction can be either $\psi$ ψ -epistemic or $\psi$ ψ -ontic but not both. However, we argue, nothing about the informal ideas of epistemic and ontic interpretations rules out wavefunctions representing both reality and knowledge. The implications of the Pusey–Barrett–Rudolph theorem and many other issues may be rethought in the light of our analysis.Abstract In discussion of the interpretation of quantum mechanics the terms ‘ontic’ and ‘epistemic’ are often used in the sense of pertaining to what exists, and pertaining to cognition or knowledge respectively. The terms are also often associated with the formal definitions given by Harrigan and Spekkens for the wavefunction in quantum mechanics to be $$\psi $$ ψ -ontic or $$\psi $$ ψ -epistemic in the context of the ontological models framework. The formal definitions are contradictories, so that the wavefunction can be either $$\psi $$ ψ -epistemic or $$\psi $$ ψ -ontic but not both. However, we argue, nothing about the informal ideas of epistemic and ontic interpretations rules out wavefunctions representing both reality and knowledge. The implications of the Pusey–Barrett–Rudolph theorem and many other issues may be rethought in the light of our analysis.

arXiv:2101.06436Quantum Studies Mathematics and FoundationsApr 27, 202225 citations

Harrigan and Spekkens give formal definitions for the wavefunction in quantum mechanics to be

\psi

-ontic or

\psi

-epistemic, such that the wavefunction can only be one or the other. We argue that nothing about the informal ideas of epistemic and ontic interpretations rules out wavefunctions representing both reality and knowledge. The implications of the Pusey-Barrett-Rudolph theorem and many other issues need to be rethought in the light of our analysis.

\psi

ψ -ontic or

\psi

ψ -epistemic in the context of the ontological models framework. The formal definitions are contradictories, so that the wavefunction can be either

\psi

ψ -epistemic or

\psi

ψ -ontic but not both. However, we argue, nothing about the informal ideas of epistemic and ontic interpretations rules out wavefunctions representing both reality and knowledge. The implications of the Pusey–Barrett–Rudolph theorem and many other issues may be rethought in the light of our analysis.