Ontology of an electron passing through a Stern-Gerlach magnet

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the ontology of an electron as it passes through a Stern-Gerlach magnet, exploring the implications of measurement in quantum mechanics. Participants examine the nature of spin, existence, and the limitations of scientific inquiry regarding unmeasured states, touching on interpretations of quantum mechanics and the philosophical implications of these interpretations.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that an electron does not have a defined spin or position until measured, raising questions about the existence of the electron itself prior to measurement.
  • Others argue that the question of what happens when not measuring cannot be answered by the scientific method, suggesting a limitation in our understanding of quantum mechanics.
  • There is a viewpoint that the spin of an electron is a random value before measurement, which becomes reliable post-measurement, aligning with the essence of the scientific method.
  • Some participants discuss the concept of ontology in quantum mechanics, asserting that it differs from classical mechanics, where trajectories can be defined regardless of measurement.
  • Several contributions highlight the role of interpretations in quantum mechanics, suggesting that ontology may depend on the chosen interpretation.
  • There is a contention regarding whether scientific methods can address questions about unmeasured systems, with some asserting that classical mechanics can provide answers while others disagree.
  • Participants explore the implications of particle-wave duality and the nature of quantum entities, with some suggesting that the ontology of quantum mechanics is counterintuitive.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the ontology of quantum mechanics and the implications of measurement. There is no consensus on whether scientific methods can address questions about unmeasured states, and interpretations of quantum mechanics remain a point of contention.

Contextual Notes

Discussions include references to classical mechanics and its predictive capabilities, contrasting with the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics. The conversation reflects varying definitions of the scientific method and its applicability to ontology.

  • #31
I see this through the prism of a materialistic interpretation of action in a closed world.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
martinbn said:
That the particles/fields exist, in this example the electron.
That's not an ontology. This situation you describe is exactly why to this day QT has no ontology. Shut up and calculate is not an ontology.
 
  • #33
EPR said:
That's not an ontology. This situation you describe is exactly why to this day QT has no ontology. Shut up and calculate is not an ontology.
What is onltology according to you?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 94 ·
4
Replies
94
Views
15K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K