The AHI inperpretation of Quantum Mechanics

[Bertrand]

These days, there is here a debate concerning a (not so) new interpretation of the nature of the wave function in quantum mechanics, called “AHI” which stands for “Aristotle Heisenberg Interpretation”.

The author says it had been proposed by W. Heisenberg some years after the second world war. He also says that this interpretation can be a solution to the debate between the objective and realistic interpretation of the “Everettans”, and the subjective Copenhagen Interpretation. The main idea consists in considering that the ontological status of the wave function corresponds to what Aristotle named “potentia”, an intermediate state between being, and non-being. This theory could lead both to the realistic objective interpretation, and to the Copenhagen interpretation, and somehow, reconcile them.

The author also pledges for a sort of mutual understanding and communication between science and philosophy, claiming that, at least before the war, in Europe, and especially in Germany, the great physicists, like Einstein or Heisenberg, and others, were interested in philosophy, at least as much as in science, and their new revolutionary theories were based on philosophical points of view (generally some variant of positivism). It’s only after the war that a new point of view emerged in physics, pushing philosophical questions out of the scientific debate, and promoting the famous principle “shut up and calculate”.

The (English version) of the book is available at : http://www.lulu.com/content/501037

The 10 first pages of the book are available by clicking on Preview this book

I would be interested in having your opinion ...

Bertrand

 

[eljose79]

Dear Bertrand,

Thank you for bringing this interpretation to my attention. I am always interested in exploring different perspectives and theories, especially when it comes to a complex and mysterious field like quantum mechanics.

The AHI interpretation certainly seems intriguing and I appreciate the effort to bridge the gap between the objective and subjective interpretations of quantum mechanics. However, I do have some concerns and questions regarding this theory.

Firstly, I am not entirely convinced that this interpretation can fully reconcile the two opposing views. The concept of "potentia" as an intermediate state between being and non-being is a philosophical idea and may not necessarily have a place in scientific theories. While it may provide a new perspective, it is important to remember that scientific theories are based on empirical evidence and mathematical models, not philosophical concepts.

Additionally, I am curious about the evidence and experiments that support this interpretation. As scientists, we rely on data and experiments to validate and support our theories. Without solid evidence, it may be difficult to fully accept this interpretation as a valid explanation of quantum mechanics.

Lastly, I agree with the author's call for mutual understanding and communication between science and philosophy. However, I do not believe that philosophical questions were completely pushed out of scientific debates after the war. In fact, many scientists today still engage in philosophical discussions and debates, and it is important for us to continue doing so in order to fully understand and advance our understanding of the universe.

I will definitely take a look at the book and the preview, and I am interested to learn more about this interpretation. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and I look forward to further discussions on this topic.

 

[denian]

I find the AHI interpretation of quantum mechanics to be an intriguing and thought-provoking concept. The idea of considering the wave function as an intermediate state between being and non-being, as described by Aristotle, is a unique approach to understanding the nature of quantum mechanics.

The AHI interpretation also offers a potential solution to the ongoing debate between the objective and realistic interpretation of the Everettans and the subjective Copenhagen Interpretation. By reconciling these two perspectives, the AHI interpretation could provide a more holistic understanding of quantum mechanics.

I also appreciate the author's call for a mutual understanding and communication between science and philosophy. It is important for scientists to consider philosophical perspectives in their research, as it can lead to new and innovative ideas. The fact that renowned physicists like Einstein and Heisenberg were interested in philosophy further supports the value of this approach.

I am interested in reading the book and exploring the AHI interpretation further. It is always beneficial for scientists to broaden their understanding and consider different perspectives in their work. Thank you for sharing this thought-provoking concept.