Interpretările mecanicii cuantice

De la Wikipedia, enciclopedia liberă
Salt la: Navigare, căutare

Interpretările mecanicii cuantice sunt expuneri și argumentări care încearcă să explice în ce fel mecanica cuantică modelează modul nostru de a înțelege natura. Deși mecanica cuantică a fost testată experimental cu rigurozitate și în profunzime, multe dintre aceste experimente se pretează unor interpretări diferite. Există un număr de școli de gândire diferite, în special în ceea ce privește caracterul determinist al mecanicii cuantice. Problema este de interes deosebit pentru filozofia fizicii și continuă să-i preocupe chiar pe fizicieni. Aceștia din urmă consideră că interpretarea mecanicii cuantice constă în interpretarea formalismului său matematic, și anume în elucidarea sensului fizic al entităților matematice introduse de teorie.

Nu există consens științific cu privire la ideea că mecanica cuantică ar fi respins determinismul.[1][2] În timp ce descrierea mecanicii cuantice este indeterministă, nu cunoaștem dacă acest indeterminism este ontic sau epistemic.[1]

Note[modificare | modificare sursă]

  1. ^ a b Bishop, Robert C. (2011). „Chaos, Indeterminism, and Free Will”. in Kane, Robert. The Oxford Handbook of Free Wil (ed. Second). Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. p. 90. ISBN 987-0-19-539969-1. http://books.google.nl/books?id=kzcFDsWg0GEC&pg=PA90&lpg=PA90&dq=Bell+1987,+1-13,+29-39;+Bohm+1952a,+1952b;+Bohm+and+Hiley+1993;+Bub+1997,+40-114,+Holland+1993;+see+also+the+preceding+essay+in+this+volume+by+Hodgson&source=bl&ots=5in429oGBd&sig=VuIoYZcukMN7fKCMC2EBalkb7g4&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=d9kQUbTCLqnW0QXtlIG4DA&ved=0CEcQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=Bell%201987%2C%201-13%2C%2029-39%3B%20Bohm%201952a%2C%201952b%3B%20Bohm%20and%20Hiley%201993%3B%20Bub%201997%2C%2040-114%2C%20Holland%201993%3B%20see%20also%20the%20preceding%20essay%20in%20this%20volume%20by%20Hodgson&f=false. Accesat la 4 februarie 2013. „The key question is whether to understand the nature of this probability as epistemic or ontic. Along epistemic lines, one possibility is that there is some additional factor (i.e., a hidden mechanism) such that once we discover and understand this factor, we would be able to predict the observed behavior of the quantum stoplight with certainty (physicists call this approach a "hidden variable theory"; see, e.g., Bell 1987, 1-13, 29-39; Bohm 1952a, 1952b; Bohm and Hiley 1993; Bub 1997, 40-114, Holland 1993; see also the preceding essay in this volume by Hodgson). Or perhaps there is an interaction with the broader environment (e.g., neighboring buildings, trees) that we have not taken into account in our observations that explains how these probabilities arise (physicists call this approach decoherence or consistent histories15). Under either of these approaches, we would interpret the observed indeterminism in the behavior of stoplights as an expression of our ignorance about the actual workings. Under an ignorance interpretation, indeterminism would not be a fundamental feature of quantum stoplights, but merely epistemic in nature due to our lack of knowledge about the system. Quantum stoplights would turn to be deterministic after all.” 
  2. ^ Baggott, Jim E. (2004). „Complementarity and Entanglement”. Beyond Measure: Modern Physics, Philosophy, and the Meaning of Quantum Theory. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. p. 203. ISBN 0-19-852536-2. http://books.google.nl/books?id=uVdjwsqrgz8C&pg=PA203&dq=scientific+consensus+determinism+bell+theorem&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=4v8PUaL5MarK0QWk8oCwBw&ved=0CFgQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=scientific%20consensus%20determinism%20bell%20theorem&f=false. Accesat la 4 februarie 2013. „So, was Einstein wrong? In the sense that the EPR paper argued in favour of an objective reality for each quantum particle in an entangled pair independent of the other and of the measuring device, the answer must be yes. But if we take a wider view and ask instead if Einstein was wrong to hold to the realist's belief that the physics of the universe should be objective and deterministic, we must acknowledge that we cannot answer such a question. It is in the nature of theoretical science that there can be no such thing as certainty. A theory is only 'true' for as long as the majority of the scientific community maintain a consensus view that the theory is the one best able to explain the observations. And the story of quantum theory is not over yet.”