Is Quantum Field Theory Logically Consistent?

[davidpbrown]

A thread in another place has lead us to question whether it is valid to use logic to approach the quantum world!

Although I feel this is a stupid question I have no authority to suggest the poster is talking nonsense.

Can someone suggest whether the statement
"The quantum world, viewed in terms of quantum field theory is
logically consistent, and does not lead to illogical thinking."
is true or false?

That statement was used in defense of logic against statements that suggest you should throw out "classical worldviews and formal logic".

The posters now resorting to insult but an injection of good sense and knowledge on the matter I feel would be very useful.

The full thread if your interested is at http://forums.philosophyforums.com/showthread.php?t=3127

Thanks and regards
davidpbrown

 

[selfAdjoint]

Quantum Field Theory is not irrational. It is developed using valid mathematics from reasonable physical assumptions. Its development does not in any way call formal logic into question.

That said, it is true that the fifty-year effort to prove QFD logically and mathematically consistent has so far come up empty, and there may be reasons to believe it will never be proved so.

 

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

Originally posted by davidpbrown

Can someone suggest whether the statement
"The quantum world, viewed in terms of quantum field theory is
logically consistent, and does not lead to illogical thinking."
is true or false?

The possiblity is that some mathematical pathways may not work out having a provable comport in some sense of a reality that we can measure, but the math will follow a logic.

If we follow the logic, based upon the leading by mathematics, we have the possibliity of being mislead, as natures manner way have turned, and we missed it.

BUT, "Viewed in terms of Quantum Field Theory" it should appear very consistent.

 

[davidpbrown]

Thankyou for the replys, very helpful.

The suggestion, from wuliheron, is now that Bell's Theorum doesn't have rational explanation..

I've not seen this before but so far it only suggests to me our understanding is incomplete not that we should dismiss logic.

davidpbrown

 

[Eh]

I wouldn't worry too much about what someone who has never learned QM says about the subject. Advice: Don't waste your time.

 

[davidpbrown]

Well yes, but then I don't like to give up on someone by default.. the argument has already introduced me to a new area. Of course there can come a point after which neither side benefits.

davidpbrown
-------------

Give me fruitful error anytime full of seeds, bursting with its own corrections. You can keep your sterile truth for yourself. [Vilfredo Pareto: The Mind and Society]

 

[FZ+]

I'm speaking pretty randomly but I think the point being made is that QFT is deductively logical, but inductively not. Hence logic is still useful as a process, but apparently obvious axioms should be called into question.

Sort of.