arXiv:quant-ph/0608011

Questions and Physical Reality -Simple Philosophical considerations-

Michele Caponigro, Helen Lynn

Published Aug 1, 2006• 0 citations

Abstract

We argue, through some philosophical considerations, on (i)dependent or (ii) an independent existence of physical reality underlying quantum states. According these simple considerations, we conclude that is impossible to have a clear independent existence of physical reality, we need to search the reasons in the relationship between our questions (the observers) and the consequent answers (always estimated by the same observers). Finally, we infer that every theory is affected by our "questions", so we cannot speak about an unconditional and independent theory underlying physical reality. Plan of the paper. The existence of physical reality underlying quantum states: (i) it before bit,(ii)it without bit,(iii)it from bit.

DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/0608011

Related papers

Quantum Mechanics: 44 Admissible Questions? -Not only Fapp-

Michele Caponigro, Helen Lynn

The words: determinism, hidden variables, subjectivism, information, objectivism, informational-theoretic axioms,observers have some connection with physical reality? What we mean with "description" of physical reality? When we say that we understand this reality? Certain parameters:position, velocity are sufficient? We will focus only to conceptual considerations regarding the relation between the "questions" and the relative "answers" in general and specifically in quantum mechanics. It is usually believed that the answers are more important of the questions, for this reason we can read many answers everywhere and in different field of knowledge. We need to add and clarify some things: (i) usually an answers require a question, (ii) but, as we know, their relation is not so simple and immediate, (iii) For instance: a)an epistemic questions give us ontic answers? b)the answer has a connection with the question and vice versa? c)we could to infer a question starting from an answer? d)there are answers without questions? These answers could be in some framework considered as ontic answers? The relative scientific works are the same time ontic? Speaking of quantum mechanics we see around many answers in the meantime we do not see the correspondent questions, these answers seem completely independent, and this seem a right road, the road of the independent nature unlinked from human thoughts. We retain instead that questions can affect the possible answers. Exist "something" before the question?

arXiv:quant-ph/0606032Prespacetime journalJun 5, 20060 citations

Physical Realities from Simple Philosophical Conjectures

Helen Lynn, Michele Caponigro

We will focus on the Quantum theory and starting from simple philosophical conjectures, we infer possible different physical realities. Also we argue of possible wavefunction emerging under specific conditions of the physical reality. Finally, we affirm that the "hidden choice" of the ontic elements as primitive is a fundamental step to analyze the construction of any theory.

arXiv:physics/0608208Aug 21, 20060 citations

Hidden Variables: Ontology/Epistemology & Contextuality/Non-Classicality

Wolf, Fred Alan

What does quantum physics tell us about the nature of reality, specifically the parts of reality we do not directly perceive called hidden variables? One may think it could tell us a lot because of our enhanced technological sensing abilities that delve into the realms that quantum physics covers so well. Surprisingly, it seems to surround us in a deeper mystery rather than reveal more of nature's secrets. It seems that we cannot escape from philosophical consideration when dealing with what is hidden in quantum physics. In Part I we will look at how Epistemology and Ontology bear upon Hidden Variables. In Part II we will consider Hidden Variables in the light of Contextuality, and Non-Classicality. Inevitably questions of subjectivity and objectivity arise in dealing with states of observation. How should we think about these states? Perhaps it is a question of the meaning associated with our knowledge of a state-that is, a question of ontology or epistemology. The issue of ontic and epistemic states is particularly important when considering hidden variables in quantum physics because, as one may argue, the interpretation of quantum states as either ontic or epistemic will naturally lead to different assumptions about how reality is constructed; if it is constructed or not. It also raises the question of what attributes we are able to observe simultaneously and that brings contextuality into the discussion. If it turns out that reality is constructed contextually what does that imply about ontological realism? If on the other hand reality is constructed non-contextually what does that imply about ontological realism? Many implications can arise when considering these questions from a quantum physical point of view. In this paper I shall discuss how quantum physics provides some answers to these questions by considering quantum physical states and their measurements.

Cosmos and historyAug 25, 20180 citations

Can (Quantum) Information be Sorted Out from Quantum Mechanics?

Michele Caponigro, Stefano Mancini

We shall draw an affirmative answer to the question posed in the title.The key point will be a quantum description of physical reality.Once fixed at ontic level two basic elements, namely the laws of physics and the matter, we argue that the underlying physical reality emerges from the interconnection between these two elements.We consider any physical process, including measurement, modeled by unitary evolution.In this context, we will deduce quantum randomness as a consequence of inclusion of the observer into the quantum system.The global picture of the universe is in a sense deterministic, but from our own local perspective (as part of the system) we perceive quantum mechanical randomness.Then, the notion of "information" turns out to be a derivative concept.I've spent much more time thinking about the photon problem [i.e., about quantum theory] than about relativity. A. Einstein

NeuroQuantologyNov 24, 20090 citations

Can We Have an Observer-Independent Description of Physical Reality?

Sunil Thakur

Classical physics assumes that the things exist independently of an act of observation; however, quantum theory suggests that the apparent form of quantum system emerges as a consequence of an act of observation. However, quantum theory is silent on the state of the systems prior to the act of observation. It assumes that the wavefunction collapses as a consequence of an act of observation but does not explain the mechanism of the collapse of wavefunction. Therefore, it is at least incomplete, if not incorrect. In this paper, we have shown that our understanding of the nature of physical reality is based on the false premise that we observe the physical entities, but the mechanism of perception is such that we can only perceive the information generated by the physical entities, not the physical entities. As per the current understanding of the process of perception, the brain projects the information it receives from the sense organs in the physical forms. Therefore, the entity that generates the information must preexist before it can be projected in the physical form. We do not perceive the actual Moon. The apparent form of the Moon is only a projection created by our brain. The apparent form is only a manifestation of something that generates information, but that cannot be observed directly. In the light of this observation, it becomes necessary to examine if we can establish causal relationships between events assuming that the place and time and events are observer independent. Apart from using the criterion prescribed by the EPR paper, we have also used these two methods to determine if we can have an observer independent description of reality. We have shown that an entity must have observer independent values of the physical quantities, but the act of measurement only reveals the observer dependent values of the physical quantities even in the macro world. We have confirmed our observations experimentally as well as through the observation of the natural phenomena.

Apr 1, 20190 citations

Is the World Objective?

Shantena Augusto Sabbadini

The assumption of an objective world underlying all our experiences is deeply embedded in our everyday thinking and in our language, and has been an unquestioned presupposition of the scientific enterprise for at least four centuries. Yet it is well known that quantum physics raises some highly problematic questions in this respect, questions that are still open, almost a century from the inception of the theory. I would like to propose that these questions stem from deep philosophical assumptions and can be answered in a much more coherent way if we understand the notion of an objective world not as a primary reality, but as an emergent aspect of a primary process that can be described as “experiencing”. A coherent description of the appearance of an objective world in the process of experiencing relies on a certain understanding of what is technically known as the “quantum measurement problem”, i.e. the description of the process of observation in quantum physics, which is the key problematic aspect of the theory. I will propose that the basic features that characterize a quantum observation have a much wider scope, and describe in fact all acquisition of information by an “embodied observer”, in short all experiencing happening in the world. By applying to this larger context work I have done in the more technical frame of the quantum measurement problem it can be shown that the nature of the process of experiencing is such as to inevitably generate the appearance of an objective world. Thus the objectivity of the world, although not primary and ultimately real, is an intrinsic consequence of our “experiential embodiment”, i.e. of the fact that we are in the world and all our experiences correspond to physical happenings in the world. When examined in this perspective, the “paradoxes” of quantum physics are an invitation to abandon the metaphysical assumption of the primacy of the objective dimension of reality. A philosophical position much more in tune with quantum physics views the process of experiencing as the primary source of both subject and object, consciousness and world.

Open Journal of PhilosophyJan 1, 20141 citation