Search results for 'Indistinguishable' (try it on Scholar)

299 found
Sort by:
  1. Alexander Bach (1988). The Concept of Indistinguishable Particles in Classical and Quantum Physics. Foundations of Physics 18 (6):639-649.score: 12.0
    The consequences of the following definition of indistinguishability are analyzed. Indistinguishable classical or quantum particles are identical classical or quantum particles in a state characterized by a probability measure, a statistical operator respectively, which is invariant under any permutation of the particles. According to this definition the particles of classical Maxwell-Boltzmann statistics are indistinguishable.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. L. Burakovsky & L. P. Horwitz (1995). Equilibrium Relativistic Mass Distribution for Indistinguishable Events. Foundations of Physics 25 (6):785-818.score: 12.0
    A manifestly covariant relativistic statistical mechanics of a system of N indistinguishable events with motion in space-time parametrized by an invariant “historical time” τ is considered. The relativistic mass distribution for such a system is obtained from the equilibrium solution of the generalized relativistic Boltzmann equation by integration over angular and hyperangular variables. All the characteristic averages are calculated. Expressions for the pressure and the energy density are found, and the relativistic equation of state is obtained. Validity criteria are (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Peter Martin Jaworski (2013). In Defense of Fakes and Artistic Treason: Why Visually-Indistinguishable Duplicates of Paintings Are Just as Good as the Originals. [REVIEW] Journal of Value Inquiry 47 (4):391-405.score: 12.0
    I argue that all that is relevant to appreciating art as art is the "abstract entity that is the work of art." The object of aesthetic contemplation, the bearer of aesthetic value, just is this abstract entity picked out by the sortal concept 'work of art,' which requires some vehicle but does not require the particular vehicle that is the original painting. Since this is so, the work of art is present in a visually-indistinguishable duplicate to the same extent (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Jim Lippard (1999). Historical but Indistinguishable Differences. Philo 2 (1):47-49.score: 12.0
    Victor Reppert’s paper (pp. 33-45) supposes that there are objectively indistinguishable properties between possible worlds that resultin the property of intentionality existing in one world but not in another objectively indistinguishable world, differing only in their histories. It is also a supposition of Reppert’s paper that proposed ensembles of purely natural properties that lead to the emergence of intentionality fail to do so, but instead only have referential power on the basis of imputed or projected intentionality from human (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Stevan Harnad (2000). Minds, Machines and Turing: The Indistinguishability of Indistinguishables. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 9 (4):425-445.score: 10.0
    Turing's celebrated 1950 paper proposes a very general methodological criterion for modelling mental function: total functional equivalence and indistinguishability. His criterion gives rise to a hierarchy of Turing Tests, from subtotal ("toy") fragments of our functions (t1), to total symbolic (pen-pal) function (T2 -- the standard Turing Test), to total external sensorimotor (robotic) function (T3), to total internal microfunction (T4), to total indistinguishability in every empirically discernible respect (T5). This is a "reverse-engineering" hierarchy of (decreasing) empirical underdetermination of the theory (...)
    Direct download (21 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. John D. Norton, The Inductive Significance of Observationally Indistinguishable Spacetimes.score: 10.0
    Results on the observational indistinguishability of spacetimes demonstrate the impossibility of determining by deductive inference which is our spacetime, no matter how extensive a portion of the spacetime is observed. These results do not illustrate an underdetermination of theory by evidence, since they make no decision between competing theories and they make little contact with the inductive considerations that must ground such a decision. Rather, these results express a variety of indeterminism in which a specification of the observable past always (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Alberto Zanardo (1998). Undivided and Indistinguishable Histories in Branching-Time Logics. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 7 (3):297-315.score: 10.0
    In the tree-like representation of Time, two histories are undivided at a moment t whenever they share a common moment in the future of t. In the present paper, it will first be proved that Ockhamist and Peircean branching-time logics are unable to express some important sentences in which the notion of undividedness is involved. Then, a new semantics for branching-time logic will be presented. The new semantics is based on trees endowed with an indistinguishability function, a generalization of the (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Julia Tanney (2004). On the Conceptual, Psychological, and Moral Status of Zombies, Swamp-Beings, and Other 'Behaviourally Indistinguishable' Creatures. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 69 (1):173-186.score: 9.0
    In this paper I argue that it would be unprincipled to withhold mental predicates from our behavioural duplicates however unlike us they are "on the inside." My arguments are unusual insofar as they rely neither on an implicit commitment to logical behaviourism in any of its various forms nor to a verificationist theory of meaning. Nor do they depend upon prior metaphysical commitments or to philosophical "intuitions". Rather, in assembling reminders about how the application of our consciousness and propositional attitude (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Michael Redhead & Paul Teller (1992). Particle Labels and the Theory of Indistinguishable Particles in Quantum Mechanics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 43 (2):201-218.score: 9.0
    We extend the work of French and Redhead [1988] further examining the relation of quantum statistics to the assumption that quantum entities have the sort of identity generally assumed for physical objects, more specifically an identity which makes them susceptible to being thought of as conceptually individuatable and labelable even though they cannot be experimentally distinguished. We also further examine the relation of such hypothesized identity of quantum entities to the Principle of the Identity of Indiscernibles. We conclude that although (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Adam Caulton (2013). Discerning “Indistinguishable” Quantum Systems. Philosophy of Science 80 (1):49-72.score: 9.0
    In a series of recent papers, Simon Saunders, Fred Muller and Michael Seevinck have collectively argued, against the folklore, that some non-trivial version of Leibniz's principle of the identity of indiscernibles is upheld in quantum mechanics. They argue that all particles---fermions, paraparticles, anyons, even bosons---may be weakly discerned by some physical relation. Here I show that their arguments make illegitimate appeal to non-symmetric, i.e.~permutation-non-invariant, quantities, and that therefore their conclusions do not go through. However, I show that alternative, symmetric quantities (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. John D. Norton, The Inductive Significance of Observationally Indistinguishable Spacetimes: (Peter Achinstein has the Last Laugh).score: 9.0
    For several years, through the “material theory of induction,” I have urged that inductive inferences are not licensed by universal schemas, but by material facts that hold only locally (Norton, 2003, 2005). My goal has been to defend inductive inference against inductive skeptics by demonstrating when and how inductive inferences are properly made. Since I have always admired Peter Achinstein as a staunch defender of induction, it was a surprise when Peter..
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. David J. Alexander (2012). Weak Inferential Internalism is Indistinguishable From Externalism – A Reply to Rhoda. Journal of Philosophical Research 37:387-394.score: 9.0
    In “Weak Inferential Internalism” I defended the frequently voiced criticism that any internalist account of inferential justification generates a vicious regress. My defense involved criticizing a recent form of internalism, “Weak Inferential Internalism” (WII) defended by Hookway and Rhoda. I argued that while WII does not generate a vicious regress, the position is only distinguishable from externalism insofar as it makes an arbitrary distinction between individuals who believe for the very same reason. Either way, WII is not a defensible internalist (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Paul Horwich (1982). How to Choose Between Empirically Indistinguishable Theories. Journal of Philosophy 79 (2):61-77.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Daniela Monaldi (2009). A Note on the Prehistory of Indistinguishable Particles. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 40 (4):383-394.score: 9.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. J. L. Bermudez (2007). Indistinguishable Elements and Mathematical Structuralism. Analysis 67 (2):112-116.score: 9.0
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. John Kadvany (2010). Indistinguishable From Magic: Computation is Cognitive Technology. [REVIEW] Minds and Machines 20 (1):119-143.score: 9.0
    This paper explains how mathematical computation can be constructed from weaker recursive patterns typical of natural languages. A thought experiment is used to describe the formalization of computational rules, or arithmetical axioms, using only orally-based natural language capabilities, and motivated by two accomplishments of ancient Indian mathematics and linguistics. One accomplishment is the expression of positional value using versified Sanskrit number words in addition to orthodox inscribed numerals. The second is Pāṇini’s invention, around the fifth century BCE, of a formal (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. José Luis Bermúdez (2007). Indistinguishable Elements and Mathematical Structuralism. Analysis 67 (294):112-116.score: 9.0
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. John D. Norton (2011). Observationally Indistinguishable Spacetimes: A Challenge for Any Inductivist. In Gregory J. Morgan (ed.), Philosophy of Science Matters: The Philosophy of Peter Achinstein. Oxford University Press. 164.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Demetris Koutsoyiannis (2013). Physics of Uncertainty, the Gibbs Paradox and Indistinguishable Particles. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 44 (4):480-489.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. José Luis Bermúdez (2007). Indistinguishable Elements and Mathematical Structuralism. Analysis 67 (294):112–116.score: 9.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. David Alexander (2012). Weak Inferential Internalism is Indistinguishable From Externalism. Journal of Philosophical Research 37:387-394.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Clark Glymour, Indistinguishable Space-Times and the Fundamental Group.score: 9.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Décio Krause (1996). Axioms for Collections of Indistinguishable Objects. Logique Et Analyse 153 (154):69-93.score: 9.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Particle Labels (1992). The Theory of Indistinguishable Particles in Quantum Mechanics'(Joint Paper with P. Teller). British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 43:201-8.score: 9.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. A. B. Slomson (1970). An Algebraic Characterization of Indistinguishable Cardinals. Journal of Symbolic Logic 35 (1):97-104.score: 9.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Bas van Fraassen (1984). The Problem of Indistinguishable Particles. In James T. Cushing, C. F. Delany & Gary M. Gutting (eds.), Science and Reality: Recent Work in the Philosophy of Science. University of Notre Dame Press.score: 9.0
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Graciela Domenech & Federico Holik (2007). A Discussion on Particle Number and Quantum Indistinguishability. Foundations of Physics 37 (6):855-878.score: 8.0
    The concept of individuality in quantum mechanics shows radical differences from the concept of individuality in classical physics, as E. Schrödinger pointed out in the early steps of the theory. Regarding this fact, some authors suggested that quantum mechanics does not possess its own language, and therefore, quantum indistinguishability is not incorporated in the theory from the beginning. Nevertheless, it is possible to represent the idea of quantum indistinguishability with a first-order language using quasiset theory (Q). In this work, we (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. William C. Fish (2008). Disjunctivism, Indistinguishability, and the Nature of Hallucination. In Adrian Haddock & Fiona Macpherson (eds.), Disjunctivism: Perception, Action, Knowledge. Oxford University Press. 144--167.score: 6.0
    In the eyes of some of its critics, disjunctivism fails to support adequately the key claim that a particular hallucination might be indistinguishable from a certain kind of veridical perception despite the two states having nothing other than this in common. Scott Sturgeon, for example, has complained that disjunctivism ‘‘offers no positive story about hallucination at all’’ (2000: 11) and therefore ‘‘simply takes [indistinguishability] for granted’’ (2000: 12). So according to Sturgeon, what the disjunctivist needs to provide is a (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Stevan Harnad (1989). Minds, Machines and Searle. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 1 (4):5-25.score: 6.0
    Searle's celebrated Chinese Room Argument has shaken the foundations of Artificial Intelligence. Many refutations have been attempted, but none seem convincing. This paper is an attempt to sort out explicitly the assumptions and the logical, methodological and empirical points of disagreement. Searle is shown to have underestimated some features of computer modeling, but the heart of the issue turns out to be an empirical question about the scope and limits of the purely symbolic (computational) model of the mind. Nonsymbolic modeling (...)
    Direct download (20 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. John Byron Manchak, Observational Indistinguishability and Geodesic Incompleteness.score: 6.0
    It has been suggested by Clark Glymour that the spatio-temporal structure of the universe might be underdetermined by all observational data that could ever, theoretically, be gathered. It is possible for two spacetimes to be observationally indistinguishable (OI) yet topologically distinct. David Malament extended the argument for the underdetermination of spacetime structure by showing that under quite general conditions (such as the absence of any closed timelike curves) a spacetime will always have an OI counterpart (at least in weak (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Stevan Harnad (2002). Turing Indistinguishability and the Blind Watchmaker. In James H. Fetzer (ed.), Consciousness Evolving. John Benjamins. 3-18.score: 6.0
    Many special problems crop up when evolutionary theory turns, quite naturally, to the question of the adaptive value and causal role of consciousness in human and nonhuman organisms. One problem is that -- unless we are to be dualists, treating it as an independent nonphysical force -- consciousness could not have had an independent adaptive function of its own, over and above whatever behavioral and physiological functions it "supervenes" on, because evolution is completely blind to the difference between a conscious (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Stevan Harnad (1992). The Turing Test is Not a Trick: Turing Indistinguishability is a Scientific Criterion. 3 (4):9-10.score: 6.0
    It is important to understand that the Turing Test (TT) is not, nor was it intended to be, a trick; how well one can fool someone is not a measure of scientific progress. The TT is an empirical criterion: It sets AI's empirical goal to be to generate human-scale performance capacity. This goal will be met when the candidate's performance is totally indistinguishable from a human's. Until then, the TT simply represents what it is that AI must endeavor (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Darrin W. Belousek (2000). Statistics, Symmetry, and the Conventionality of Indistinguishability in Quantum Mechanics. Foundations of Physics 30 (1):1-34.score: 6.0
    The question to be addressed is, In what sense and to what extent do quantum statistics for, and the standard formal quantum-mechanical description of, systems of many identical particles entail that identical quantum particles are indistinguishable? This paper argues that whether or not we consider identical quantum particles as indistinguishable is a matter of theory choice underdetermined by logic and experiment.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Georg Wikman (2013). The Notion of Order in Mathematics and Physics. Similarity, Difference and Indistinguishability. Foundations of Physics 43 (4):568-596.score: 6.0
    The notion of order as a universal and fundamental conceptual category is discussed as being based on sets of similar differences and different similarities. A discussion of relationships between order and disorder is followed by a proposal for a mathematical theory based on non-ordinality which could also have relevance for indistinguishables in physics.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Willem M. Muynck & Gidi P. Liempd (1986). On the Relation Between Indistinguishability of Identical Particles and (Anti)Symmetry of the Wave Function in Quantum Mechanics. Synthese 67 (3):477 - 496.score: 6.0
    Two different concepts of distinguishability are often mixed up in attempts to derive in quantum mechanics the (anti)symmetry of the wave function from indistinguishability of identical particles. Some of these attempts are analyzed and shown to be defective. It is argued that, although identical particles should be considered as observationally indistinguishable in (anti)symmetric states, they may be considered to be conceptually distinguishable. These two notions of (in)distinguishability have quite different physical origins, the former one being related to observations while (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. S. Fujita (1991). On the Indistinguishability of Classical Particles. Foundations of Physics 21 (4):439-457.score: 6.0
    If no property of a system of many particles discriminates among the particles, they are said to be indistinguishable. This indistinguishability is equivalent to the requirement that the many-particle distribution function and all of the dynamic functions for the system be symmetric. The indistinguishability defined in terms of the discrete symmetry of many-particle functions cannot change in the continuous classical statistical limit in which the number density n and the reciprocal temperature β become small. Thus, microscopic particles like electrons (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. C. Maria Keet, Granulation with Indistinguishability, Equivalence, or Similarity.score: 6.0
    One of the relations used with granularity is indistinguishability, where distinguishable entities in a finer-grained granule are indistinguishable in a coarser-grained granule. This relation is a subtype of equivalence relation, which is used in the other direction to create finer-grained granules. Together with the notion of similarity, we formally prove some intuitive properties of the indistinguishability relation for both qualitative and quantitative granularity, that with a given granulation there must be at least two granules (levels of granularity) for it (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Alberto Zanardo (2013). Indistinguishability, Choices, and Logics of Agency. Studia Logica 101 (6):1215-1236.score: 6.0
    This paper deals with structures ${\langle{\bf T}, I\rangle}$ in which T is a tree and I is a function assigning each moment a partition of the set of histories passing through it. The function I is called indistinguishability and generalizes the notion of undividedness. Belnap’s choices are particular indistinguishability functions. Structures ${\langle{\bf T}, I\rangle}$ provide a semantics for a language ${\mathcal{L}}$ with tense and modal operators. The first part of the paper investigates the set-theoretical properties of the set of indistinguishability (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Graciela Domenech, Federico Holik & Décio Krause (2008). Q-Spaces and the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Foundations of Physics 38 (11):969-994.score: 5.0
    Our aim in this paper is to take quite seriously Heinz Post’s claim that the non-individuality and the indiscernibility of quantum objects should be introduced right at the start, and not made a posteriori by introducing symmetry conditions. Using a different mathematical framework, namely, quasi-set theory, we avoid working within a label-tensor-product-vector-space-formalism, to use Redhead and Teller’s words, and get a more intuitive way of dealing with the formalism of quantum mechanics, although the underlying logic should be modified. We build (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Dennis Dieks & Andrea Lubberdink (2011). How Classical Particles Emerge From the Quantum World. Foundations of Physics 41 (6):1051-1064.score: 5.0
    The symmetrization postulates of quantum mechanics (symmetry for bosons, antisymmetry for fermions) are usually taken to entail that quantum particles of the same kind (e.g., electrons) are all in exactly the same state and therefore indistinguishable in the strongest possible sense. These symmetrization postulates possess a general validity that survives the classical limit, and the conclusion seems therefore unavoidable that even classical particles of the same kind must all be in the same state—in clear conflict with what we know (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Antti Karjalainen & Adam Morton (2008). Contrastivity and Indistinguishability. Social Epistemology 22 (3):271-280.score: 5.0
    We give a general description of a class of contrastive constructions, intended to capture what is common to contrastive knowledge, belief, hope, fear, understanding and other cases where one expresses a propositional attitude in terms of “rather than”. The crucial element is the agent's incapacity to distinguish some possibilities from others. Contrastivity requires a course-graining of the set of possible worlds. As a result, contrastivity will usually cut across logical consequence, so that an agent can have an attitude to p (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Newton Costa, Olimpia Lombardi & Mariano Lastiri (2013). A Modal Ontology of Properties for Quantum Mechanics. Synthese 190 (17):3671-3693.score: 5.0
    Our purpose in this paper is to delineate an ontology for quantum mechanics that results adequate to the formalism of the theory. We will restrict our aim to the search of an ontology that expresses the conceptual content of the recently proposed modal-Hamiltonian interpretation, according to which the domain referred to by non-relativistic quantum mechanics is an ontology of properties. The usual strategy in the literature has been to focus on only one of the interpretive problems of the theory and (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Ariel Cohen, Michael Kaminski & Johann A. Makowsky (2008). Notions of Sameness by Default and Their Application to Anaphora, Vagueness, and Uncertain Reasoning. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 17 (3):285-306.score: 5.0
    We motivate and formalize the idea of sameness by default: two objects are considered the same if they cannot be proved to be different. This idea turns out to be useful for a number of widely different applications, including natural language processing, reasoning with incomplete information, and even philosophical paradoxes. We consider two formalizations of this notion, both of which are based on Reiter’s Default Logic. The first formalization is a new relation of indistinguishability that is introduced by default. We (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Jonas Rafael Becker Arenhart (2011). A Discussion on Finite Quasi-Cardinals in Quasi-Set Theory. Foundations of Physics 41 (8):1338-1354.score: 5.0
    Quasi-set theory Q is an alternative set-theory designed to deal mathematically with collections of indistinguishable objects. The intended interpretation for those objects is the indistinguishable particles of non-relativistic quantum mechanics, under one specific interpretation of that theory. The notion of cardinal of a collection in Q is treated by the concept of quasi-cardinal, which in the usual formulations of the theory is introduced as a primitive symbol, since the usual means of cardinal definition fail for collections of (...) objects. In a recent work, Domenech and Holik have proposed a definition of quasi-cardinality in Q. They claimed their definition of quasi-cardinal not only avoids the introduction of that notion as a primitive one, but also that it may be seen as a first step in the search for a version of Q that allows for a greater representative power. According to them, some physical systems can not be represented in the usual formulations of the theory, when the quasi-cardinal is considered as primitive. In this paper, we discuss their proposal and aims, and also, it is presented a modification from their definition we believe is simpler and more general. (shrink)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Bert Baumgaertner (2013). Smooth Yet Discrete: Modeling Both Non-Transitivity and the Smoothness of Graded Categories With Discrete Classification Rules. [REVIEW] Minds and Machines:1-18.score: 5.0
    Many of our categorization experiences are non-transitive. For some objects a, b and c, a and b can appear indistinguishable, and likewise b and c, but a and c can appear distinguishable. Many categories also appear to be smooth; transitions between cases are not experienced as sharp, but rather as continuous. These two features of our categorization experiences tend to be addressed separately. Moreover, many views model smoothness by making use of infinite degrees. This paper presents a methodological strategy (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Newton da Costa, Olimpia Lombardi & Mariano Lastiri (2013). A Modal Ontology of Properties for Quantum Mechanics. Synthese 190 (17):3671-3693.score: 5.0
    Our purpose in this paper is to delineate an ontology for quantum mechanics that results adequate to the formalism of the theory. We will restrict our aim to the search of an ontology that expresses the conceptual content of the recently proposed modal-Hamiltonian interpretation, according to which the domain referred to by non-relativistic quantum mechanics is an ontology of properties. The usual strategy in the literature has been to focus on only one of the interpretive problems of the theory and (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Jonathan Bain (2004). Theories of Newtonian Gravity and Empirical Indistinguishability. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 35 (3):345--76.score: 4.0
    In this essay, I examine the curved spacetime formulation of Newtonian gravity known as Newton–Cartan gravity and compare it with flat spacetime formulations. Two versions of Newton–Cartan gravity can be identified in the physics literature—a ‘‘weak’’ version and a ‘‘strong’’ version. The strong version has a constrained Hamiltonian formulation and consequently a well-defined gauge structure, whereas the weak version does not (with some qualifications). Moreover, the strong version is best compared with the structure of what Earman (World enough and spacetime. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Paul Teller & Michael Redhead (2000). Is Indistinguishability in Quantum Mechanics Conventional? Foundations of Physics 30 (6):951-957.score: 4.0
    Darrin Belousek has argued that the indistinguishability of quantum particles is conventional “in the Duhemian–Einsteinian sense,” in part by critially examining prior arguments given by Redhead and Teller. Belousek's discussion provides a useful occasion to clarify some of those arguments, acknowledge respects in which they were misleading, and comment on how they can be strengthened. We also comment briefly on the relevant sense of “conventional.”.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Igor Douven & Leon Horsten (1998). Earman on Underdetermination and Empirical Indistinguishability. Erkenntnis 49 (3):303-320.score: 4.0
    Earman (1993) distinguishes three notions of empirical indistinguishability and offers a rigorous framework to investigate how each of these notions relates to the problem of underdetermination of theory choice. He uses some of the results obtained in this framework to argue for a version of scientific anti- realism. In the present paper we first criticize Earman's arguments for that position. Secondly, we propose and motivate a modification of Earman's framework and establish several results concerning some of the notions of indistinguishability (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 299