The notion of reality in the physical world has become, during the last century, somewhat problematic. The contrast between the simple and obvious reality of the innumerable instruments, machines, engines, and gadgets produced by our technological industry, which is applied physics, and of the vague and abstract reality of the fundamental concepts of physical science, as forces and fields, particles and quanta, is doubtlessly bewildering. There has already developed a gap between pure and applied science (...) and between the groups of men devoted to the one or the other activity, a separation that may lead to a dangerous estrangement. Physics needs a unifying philosophy, expressible in ordinary language, to bridge this gulf between "reality" as thought of in practice and in theory. I am not a philosopher but a theoretical physicist. I cannot provide a well balanced philosophy of science that would take due account of the ideas developed by differing schools, but I shall endeavor to formulate some ideas which have helped me in my own struggle with these problems. (shrink)

This article was originally Lai drunk leaves professor in 1994 year March 12 to 27 at Fu Jen Catholic University Department of Philosophy lecture on "Philosophy of Science" theme when the speech of course, today is led by Professor Shen-ching translated into Chinese to satisfy the readers. Speeches, the Lai drunk leaves professor from the phenomenological approach explore and rebuild "it" concept formation of thought processes, and especially from the physics theory in future test volume of this issue, that the (...) physics of the novel is that it is in theory integrated into the transcendental appearance regardless above, and thus different concepts in general regardless of the theory described. For him, physics theory although the use of purely abstract terms, but it still gives the specific physical presentation, try The arguments are purely ideal state, reflecting the world to open the actual Field of obvious things. He eventually proposed and therefore, physics can be interpreted as a phenomenological manifestation of Planning and its integration of theoretical representation regardless transcendental state, to give a physical reality now. This is a speech on physical reality delivered by Jean Ladrière in a series of talks related to philosophy of science during his visit to the Department of Philosophy, Fu Jen Catholic University from March 12 to March 27, 1994. Here it is translated into Chinese by Prof. Vincent Shen to exemplify an aspect of his philosophy. This paper attempts to reconstitute the process of thought by which the concept of reality is constructed and to consider it under the perspective of physics. For Jean Ladrière, the originality of physics is to integrate the transcendental discourse into its theoretical representation. All in using abstract terms, physical theories show us what happens effectively in the field of world manifestation. He would suggest that physics can be interpreted as a phenomenological project to make effective physical reality by integrating a transcendental discourse into its theoretical representation. (shrink)

SummaryThis essay concerns the concept of reality, considered in the perspective of physics. It tries to reconstruct the process of thought by which this concept is constituted. In this process, reality is transferred from the lived experience of existence, apprehended in the simple consciousness of oneself, to what gives itself, in experience, as an independent source of givenness, and finally to the world, as ultimate condition of the phenomena. In physics, we have to do with an approach of (...) reality which is in terms of representation and no more in terms of lived experience. But in contemporary physics the representation is intimately connected with our praxis. What is really described is not the manifest as such, but the manifestation . The discourse of representation is no more about the phenomena themselves but about the conditions in which the phenomenon constitutes itself as phenomenon. The discourse of physics becomes thus more and more transcendental. But it integrates the transcendental discourse in the representation, giving a concrete appresentation of the non‐representable process of the becoming manifest of reality. (shrink)

The main interpretations of the quantum-mechanical wave function are presented emphasizing how they can be divided into two ensembles: The ones that deny and the other ones that attribute a form of reality to quantum waves. It is also shown why these waves cannot be classical and must be submitted to the restriction of the complementarity principle. Applying the concept of smooth complementarity, it is shown that there can be no reason to attribute reality only to the events (...) and not to the wave or to the initial state of a given system. Thereafter, an experiment proposed by the authors is presented, where it is shown that the wave-like behaviour allows predictions that are not allowed on the grounds of a particle-like behaviour. In conclusion, we upheld that quantum waves must be real even if they do not belong to the same ontological level of events, which connected with particle detections. (shrink)

We argue about a possible scenario of physical reality based on the parallelism between Poincare group and the sunyata philosophy of Nagarjuna. The notion of "relational" is the common denominator of two views. We have approached the relational concept in third-person perspective (ontic level). It is possible to deduce different physical consequence and interpretation through first-person perspective approach. This relational interpretation leave open the questions: i)we must abandon the idea for a physical system the possibility to (...) extract completeness information? ii)we must abandon the idea to infer a possible structure of physical reality? (shrink)

We reconsider briefly the relation between "physical quantity" and "physical reality in the light of recent interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. We argue, that these interpretations are conditioned from the epistemological relation between these two fundamental concepts. In detail, the choice as ontic level of the concept affect, the relative interpretation. We note, for instance, that the informational view of quantum mechanics (primacy of the subjectivity) is due mainly to the evidence of the "random" physical quantities as (...) ontic element. We will analyze four positions: Einstein, Rovelli, d'Espagnat and Zeilinger. (shrink)

The problem of getting a relativistic generalization of the CSL dynamical reduction model, which has been presented in part I, is discussed. In so doing we have the opportunity to introduce the idea of a stochastically invariant theory. The theoretical model we present, that satisfies this kind of invariance requirement, offers us the possibility to reconsider, from a new point of view, some conceptually relevant issues such as nonlocality, the legitimacy of attributing elements of physical reality to (...) class='Hi'>physical systems and the problem of establishing causal relations between physical events. (shrink)

We propose a definition of physical objects that aims to clarify some interpretational issues in quantum mechanics. We claim that the transformations generated by the objective properties of a physical system must be strictly interpreted as gauge transformations. We will argue that the uncertainty principle is a consequence of the mutual intertwining between objective properties and gauge-dependant properties. The proposed definition implies that in classical mechanics gauge-dependant properties are wrongly considered objective. We will conclude that, unlike classical mechanics, (...) quantum mechanics provides a complete objective description of physical systems. (shrink)

Investigating the nature of our apparent physical reality is a profound challenge. Our models from physics, while powerful, do not treat reality per se. The famous painter Paul Gaugin articulated the relevant existential questions famously in a grand painting - questions that also give the painting its title: D’où venons-nous? Que sommes-nous? Où allons-nous? People of religious faith, of course, assume that one can know the ultimate truth of reality, and, then, know the answers to these (...) questions. But even in such a case, there is the issue of how a believer has obtained their faith, through a revelatory or other epistemological process. Joseph Campbell grasped the difficulty of framing the key questions, noting that, “the transcendent is unknowable and unknown. God is transcendent, finally, of anything like the name ‘God.’ God is beyond names and forms.” This metaphysical puzzle concern, in part, models. Physics uses models, and such models are powerful tools: they allow us to navigate through the physical reality we live in, and manipulate aspects of it. However, the models do not lead humanity closer to any ultimate truth, or even give us a clue that there might be an ultimate truth. The problem of using models and talking about reality can be viewed in a new way however, using certain structures in Chinese philosophy. The ancient Dao De Jing states: “The heavens and the earth are not partial to institutionalized morality”. We can extend that to say, “The universe is not partial to institutionalized models”. (shrink)

In this paper we intend to discuss the importance of providing a physical representation of quantum superpositions which goes beyond the mere reference to mathematical structures and measurement outcomes. This proposal goes in the opposite direction to the project present in orthodox contemporary philosophy of physics which attempts to “bridge the gap” between the quantum formalism and common sense “classical reality”—precluding, right from the start, the possibility of interpreting quantum superpositions through non-classical notions. We will argue that in (...) order to restate the problem of interpretation of quantum mechanics in truly ontological terms we require a radical revision of the problems and definitions addressed within the orthodox literature. On the one hand, we will discuss the need of providing a formal redefinition of superpositions which captures explicitly their contextual character. On the other hand, we will attempt to replace the focus on the measurement problem, which concentrates on the justification of measurement outcomes from “weird” superposed states, and introduce the superposition problem which focuses instead on the conceptual representation of superpositions themselves. In this respect, after presenting three necessary conditions for objective physical representation, we will provide arguments which show why the classical representation of physics faces severe difficulties to solve the superposition problem. Finally, we will also argue that, if we are willing to abandon the presupposition according to which ‘Actuality = Reality’, then there is plenty of room to construct a conceptual representation for quantum superpositions. (shrink)

In the course of a study of elementary particles, an analysis is given of a fundamental presupposition of many research programs, namely the belief in the ultimate unity of physics. It is argued tht this unity-idea is incorrect. By classical physics, relativity theory and quantum theory three distinct structures of nature are revealed. Next, the essential aspect of measurement, that a measurement always results in a record, is analysed. Recording implies irreversibility and entropy production. In modern elementary particle physics the (...) record itself is all important, and therefore the entropy production due to measurement is essential. It is argued that this aspect of measurement will play a central role in a distinct theory concerning fundamental characteristics of elementary particles, revealing a fourth structure of physical reality. Some basic notions of this new theory are proposed. Finally the meaning of irreversibility on the micro-level of elementary particles is discussed, in connection with the concept of time. (shrink)

In his recently published book, The Nature of Physical Reality, Professor Margenau develops a conception of physical reality, which, on the one hand, is a repudiation of radical empiricism and which, on the other hand, is a denial of realism. Margenau believes that he has accomplished his task by means of “constructs” which, in “a large area of discourse,” are “wholly synonymous” with concepts and which, nevertheless, when verified, are “the external objects”.

The difference between the measurement bases of classical and quantum mechanics is often interpreted as a loss of reality arising in quantum mechanics. In this paper it is shown that this apparent loss occurs only if one believes that refined everyday experience determines the Euclidean space as the real space, instead of considering this space, both in classical and quantum mechanics, as a theoretical construction needed for measurement and representing one part of a dualistic space conception. From this point (...) of view, Einstein's program of a unified field theory can be interpreted as the attempt to find a physical theory that is less dualistic. However, if one rgards this dualism as resulting from the requirements of measurements, one can hope for a weakening of the dualism but not expect to remove it completely. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity has a copyright on the body of the work. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and (...) made generally available to the public. To ensure a quality reading experience, this work has been proofread and republished using a format that seamlessly blends the original graphical elements with text in an easy-to-read typeface. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

This account of the dynamical theory of chaos leads to a metaphysical picture of a world with an open future, in which the laws of physics are emergent‐downward approximations to a more subtle and supple reality and in which there is downward causation through information input as well as upward causation through energy input. Such a metaphysical picture can accommodate both human and divine agency.

Is materialism right to claim that the world of everyday-life experience – the phenomenal world – is nothing but an illusion produced in physical reality, notably in the brain? Or is Merleau-Ponty right when he defends the fundamental character of the phenomenal world while rejecting physical realism? I address these questions by exploring the nature of the body proper in Merleau-Ponty and Plessner, arguing that physical and phenomenal realism are not mutually exclusive but complementary. The argument (...) includes a close examination of the relationships between scientific and pre-scientific perspectives, between living and non-living things, and between humans and animals. (shrink)

In the following paper, the author will try to test the meaning of the transcendental approach in respect of the inner changes implied by the idea of quantum gravity. He will firstly describe the basic methodological Kant’s aim, viz. the grounding of a meta-science of physics as the a priori corpus of physical knowledge. After that, he will take into account the problematic physical and philosophical relationship between the theory of relativity and the quantum mechanics; in showing how (...) the elementary ontological and epistemological assumptions of experience result to be changed within them, he will also show the further modifications occurred in the development of the loop quantum gravity. He will particularly focus on the tough problem of the relationship space-matter, in order to settle the decisive question about the possibility of keeping a transcendental approach in the light of quantum gravity. He will positively answer by recalling Cassirer’s theory of the invariants of experience, although he will also add some problematic issues arising from the new physical context. (shrink)

Festschriften, when they are haphazard collections of pieces written by colleagues and well-wishers on the occasion of a major anniversary in the life of a distinguished man, tend to be tedious. One can more profitably go directly to the writings of the celebrant, as well as other, more voluntary publications of his well-wishers. However, the editors wish to claim that this Festschrift is different. This is so first of all because of the almost unique combination of interests and competence of (...) Henry Margenau. He is at once a distinguished physicist, an equally distinguished educator, and a prominent philosopher. These broad areas of his extraordinarily active and fruitful career are each represented in this volume in his honor, and this constitutes the particular interest of the collection. Without limiting themselves to paraphrases or empty compliments, the contributors to this book range over the scope of interest of Margenau's work, and, acknowledging its influence and significance, present their own viewpoints and conclusions. Since they include some of the most distinguished men in science and philosophy today, the privilege of having them speak to some broadly defined common concerns in a single volume is a rare one, for which our thanks must go to Henry Margenau, who inspired the papers. (shrink)

In this sweeping survey, acclaimed science writers Paul Davies and John Gribbin provide a complete overview of advances in the study of physics that have revolutionized modern science. From the weird world of quarks and the theory of relativity to the latest ideas about the birth of the cosmos, the authors find evidence for a massive paradigm shift. Developments in the studies of black holes, cosmic strings, solitons, and chaos theory challenge commonsense concepts of space, time, and matter, and demand (...) a radically altered and more fully unified view of the universe. (shrink)

Rediscussing early arguments have led to the founding of quantum electrodynamics, but it is shown that one cannot employ them for the founding of quantum GRT. These arguments rather demonstrate that Einstein's GRT is essentially classical.

It is shown that the wave equation of anN-body problem can be transformed into a system of “hydrodynamical equations” in a3N-dimensional space. The projections of the hydrodynamical variables in three-dimensional space do not obey strict equations of motion. This is shown to be connected with the fact that the mathematically possible solutions of the wave equations are much more numerous than the states of the system that are usually realized in nature. It is pointed out that the many-body wave equation (...) has to be supplemented with thermodynamic principles, so as to obtain a satisfactory description of real phenomena. (shrink)

Introduction The predominant positive view among philosophers and scientists is that consciousness is something realized in brain activity. ...

In this part we will consider recent attempts to get a relativistic CSL theory. The problem of getting such a generalization, or at least of making plausible that it exists, is of great interest. J. Bell (1990), after having expressed his dissatisfaction with the fundamental lack of precision of the standard formulation of quantum mechanics and the opinion that the only available acceptable alternatives are the Pilot Wave and the Spontaneous Localization schemes has stated: The big question, in my opinion, (...) is which, if either, of these two precise pictures can be redeveloped in a Lorentz invariant way. The point of view of this paper is that what is most interesting is not a detailed exposition of the formal aspects of the generalization, but some crucial conceptual points which have come into focus in this attempt. (shrink)

In an earlier paper written in loving memory of Asher Peres, we gave a critical analysis of the celebrated 1935 paper in which Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen (EPR) challenged the completeness of quantum mechanics. There, we had pointed out logical shortcomings in the EPR paper. Now, we raise additional questions concerning their suggested program to find a theory that would “provide a complete description of the physical reality”. In particular, we investigate the extent to which the EPR argumentation (...) could have lead to the more dramatic conclusion that quantum mechanics is in fact incorrect. With this in mind, we propose a speculation, made necessary by a logical shortcoming in the EPR paper caused by the lack of a necessary condition for “elements of reality”, and surmise that an eventually complete theory would either be inconsistent with quantum mechanics, or would at least violate Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle. (shrink)

In this paper we analyze the definition of quantum superpositions within orthodox Quantum Mechanics and their relation to physical reality. We will begin by discussing how the metaphysical presuppositions imposed by Bohr on the interpretation of QM have become not only interpretational dogmas which constrain the limits of the present Orthodox Line of Research, but also how these desiderata implicitly preclude the possibility of developing a physical representation of quantum superpositions. We will then continue analyzing how most (...) interpretations of QM argue against the existence of superpositions. Firstly, we will focus on those interpretations which attempt to recover a classical representation about ''what there is'', and secondly, we will concentrate on the arguments provided by Dieks and Griffiths who, staying close to the orthodox formalism, also attempt to ''get rid of the ghost of Schrodinger's cat''. Contrary to the OLR, we will argue -based on our definition of Meaningful Physical Statements - that from a representational realist perspective which stays close to the orthodox Hilbert space formalism, quantum superpositions are not only the key to the most important -present and future- technological and experimental developments in quantum information processing but also, they must be considered as the kernel of any interpretation of QM that attempts to provide a physical representation of reality. We will also argue that the price to pay for such representational realist development must be the abandonment of the idea that 'Actuality = Reality'. (shrink)