- #331
- 14,615
- 7,246
Yes, but the illusion is so strong that nobody really thinks that way when one is doing something.Pleonasm said:
Copenhagen: Restriction on knowledge or restriction on ontology?
- Context: Graduate
- Thread starter Demystifier
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Copenhagen Knowledge Ontology
Click For Summary
Discussion Overview
This thread explores the interpretations of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics (QM), particularly focusing on whether it imposes restrictions on knowledge or on ontology. Participants discuss the implications of these interpretations regarding the existence of physical properties and the nature of reality in quantum mechanics.
Discussion Character
- Debate/contested
- Conceptual clarification
- Exploratory
Main Points Raised
- Some participants argue that the Copenhagen interpretation suggests that certain properties, such as position and momentum, do not exist until measured, rather than merely being unknown.
- Others propose that the interpretation emphasizes restrictions on knowledge rather than on the existence of physical properties, suggesting that reality exists independently of observation.
- A participant references Heisenberg's views, indicating a preference for a return to classical realism, which posits an objective reality that exists regardless of observation.
- There is a discussion about the implications of decoherence, with some suggesting that it allows certain properties to take on meaningful values, while others argue that properties do not exist independently of measurement.
- One participant mentions the role of quantum probability versus classical probability, suggesting that quantum quantities do not have defined values outside of measurement contexts.
- Another participant challenges the interpretation of Bell's theorem, proposing that it allows for various interpretations of non-locality and does not necessarily imply that reality must conform to non-local laws.
- Some participants discuss the implications of different interpretations of quantum mechanics, including Neo-Copenhagen views and their stance on the existence of physical properties.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express differing views on whether the Copenhagen interpretation restricts knowledge or ontology, with no consensus reached. Some argue for a knowledge-based interpretation, while others emphasize ontological implications, leading to an ongoing debate.
Contextual Notes
The discussion highlights the complexity of the Copenhagen interpretation and its various formulations, as well as the challenges in reconciling quantum mechanics with classical notions of reality. Limitations include differing definitions of existence and the implications of decoherence, which remain unresolved.