Abstract
The very formal structure of quantum mechanics implies the loss of individuality of physical systems and it requires to look at the Universe as an unbroken whole. The main reason for which, within such a theory, one must renounce to a clear identification of the parts and the whole is the superposition principle which stays at the basis of the theory. It implies, as well known, the phenomenon of entanglement which, in the most extreme case, entails that the constituents of a composite system do not possess any objective property; only the system as a whole, when it is isolated, has some properties. Another source of difficulties derives from the symmetry requests that the theory imposes in the case of systems containing identical constituents. We discuss these points in detail and we outline recent proposals yielding a consistent solution to the problems arising from the entanglement between a microsystem and a macrosystem which unavoidably occurs in a measurement process. In particular we take into account the so called “collapse” theories which embody a mechanism forbidding, at an appropriate level, the persistence of superpositions and, as a consequence, lead, in general, to the emergence of precise individual properties for macroscopic systems. We then pass to a critical analysis of the difficulties related to the identity of the constituents. We stress that various misunderstandings characterize the treatment of this problem and we make fully clear how one has to deal with the very concept of entangled systems when identical constituents are involved. The ensuing picture should make clear to which extent one can still consistently ground the distinction between the parts and the whole in a genuinely quantum context
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.shpsb.2011.06.002
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 72,564
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Collapse Theories.Giancarlo Ghirardi - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Quantum Mechanics, Orthogonality, and Counting.Peter J. Lewis - 1997 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 48 (3):313-328.
Losing Your Marbles in Wavefunction Collapse Theories.Rob Clifton & Bradley Monton - 1999 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 50 (4):697 - 717.

View all 13 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Parts Ground the Whole and Are Identical to It.Roberto Loss - 2016 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 94 (3):489-498.
Consequences of Collapse.Theodore Sider - 2014 - In Donald Baxter & Aaron Cotnoir (eds.), Composition as Identity. Oxford University Press. pp. 211-221.
Ontology, Complexity, and Compositionality.Michael Strevens - forthcoming - In Matthew Slater & Zanja Yudell (eds.), Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Science: New Essays. Oxford University Press.
McDowell and Identity Theories of Truth.Julian Dodd - 1995 - Analysis 55 (3):160 - 165.
Parts of Propositions.Cody Gilmore - 2014 - In Shieva Kleinschmidt (ed.), Mereology and Location. Oxford University Press. pp. 156-208.
Quantum Mechanics and Ordinary Language: The Fuzzy Link.Peter J. Lewis - 2003 - Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1437-1446.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2012-01-15

Total views
58 ( #199,876 of 2,533,569 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #390,861 of 2,533,569 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes