Abstract
Standard quantum mechanics unquestionably violates the separability principle that classical physics (be it point-like analytic, statistical, or field-theoretic) accustomed us to consider as valid. In this paper, quantum nonseparability is viewed as a consequence of the Hilbert-space quantum mechanical formalism, avoiding thus any direct recourse to the ramifications of Kochen-Specker’s argument or Bell’s inequality. Depending on the mode of assignment of states to physical systems – unit state vectors versus non-idempotent density operators – we distinguish between strong/relational and weak/deconstructional forms of quantum nonseparability. The origin of the latter is traced down and discussed at length, whereas its relation to the all important concept of potentiality in forming a coherent picture of the puzzling entangled interconnections among spatially separated systems is also considered. Finally, certain philosophical consequences of quantum non-separability concerning the nature of quantum objects, the question of realism in quantum mechanics, and possible limitations in revealing the actual character of physical reality in its entirety are explored.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allison, H. E.: 1983, Kant’s Transcendental Idealism, Yale University Press, New Haven.
Amann, A. and Atmanspacher, H.: 1998, ‘Fluctuations in the Dynamics of Single Quantum Systems’, Stud. Hist. Phil. Mod. Phys. 29, 151–182.
Aspect, A., Grainger, G. and Roger, G.: 1982, ‘Experimental Test of Bell’s Inequalities Using Time-Varying Analyzers’, Physical Review Letters 49, 1804–1807.
Atmanspacher, H.: 1994, ‘Objectification as an Endo-Exo Transition’, in H. Atmanspacher and G. J. Dalenoort (eds), Inside Versus Outside, Springer, Berlin, pp. 15–32.
Bell, J.: 1964, ‘On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox’, Physics 1, 195–200.
Bohr, N.: 1963, Essays 1958–1962 on Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge, Wiley, New York.
Butterfield, J.: 1989, ‘A Space-Time Approach to the Bell Inequality’, in J. Cushing and E. McMullin (eds.), Philosophical Consequences of Quantum Theory: Reflections on Bell’s Theorem, Notre Dame, University of Notre Dame Press, pp. 114–144.
Chiara, d. M. L.: 1977, ‘Logical Self Reference, Set Theoretical Paradoxes and the Measurement Problem in Quantum Mechanics’, Journal of Philosophical Logic 6, 331–347.
Einstein, A.: 1971, The Born-Einstein Letters, Macmillan, New York.
Espagnat, B. De: 1995, Veiled Reality, Addison-Wesley, Reading.
Espagnat, B. De: 1998, ‘Quantum Theory: A Pointer to an Independent Reality’, quant-ph/9802046.
Fock, V.: 1957, ‘On the Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics’, Czechoslovak Journal of Physics 7, 643–656.
Gisin, N.: 1991, ‘Bell’s Inequality Holds for All Non-product States’, Physics Letters A 154, 201–202.
Healey, R.: 1991, ‘Holism and Nonseparability’, The Journal of Philosophy LXXXVIII, 393–321.
Healey, R.: 1994, ‘Nonseparable Processes and Causal Explanation’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 25: 337–374.
Heisenberg, W.: 1958, Physics and Philosophy, Harper & Row, New York.
Heisenberg, W.: 1971, Physics and Beyond, Harper & Row, New York.
Howard, D.: 1989, ‘Holism, Separability and the Metaphysical Implications of the Bell Experiments’, in J. Cushing and E. McMullin (eds.), Philosophical Consequences of Quantum Theory: Reflections on Bell’s Theorem, Notre Dame, Indiana, University of Notre Dame Press, pp. 224–253.
Howard, D.: 1997, ‘Space-Time and Separability: Problems of Identity and Individuation in Fundamental Physics’, in R. Cohen, M. Horne and J. Stachel (eds.), Potentiality, Entanglement and Passion-at-a Distance, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 113–141.
Hughston, L., Jozsa, R. and Wooters, W.: 1993, ‘A Complete Classification of Quantum Ensembles Having a Given Density Matrix’, Physics Letters A, 183, 14–18.
Jarrett, J. P.: 1984, ‘On the Physical Significance of the Locality Conditions in the Bell Arguments’, Noûs 18, 569–589.
Karakostas, V.: 1994, ‘Limitations on Stochastic Localization Models of State Vector Reduction’, International Journal of Theoretical Physics 33, 1673–1687.
Karakostas, V. and Dickson, M.: 1995, ‘Decoherence in Unorthodox Formulations of Quantum Mechanics’, Synthese 10, 61–97.
Karakostas, V.: 2003, ‘The Nature of Physical Reality in the Light of Quantum Nonsepar-ability’, Abstracts of 12th International Congress of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, Oviedo, Spain, pp. 329–330.
Karakostas, V.: 2004, ‘Nonseparability, Potentiality, and the Nature of Quantum Objects’, submitted to Philosophy of Science.
Kochen, S. and Specker, E.: 1967, ‘The Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics’, Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics 17, 59–87.
Landsman, N.: 1995, ‘Observation and Superselection in Quantum Mechanics’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 26, 45–73.
Margenau, H.: 1950, The Nature of Physical Reality, McGraw Hill, New York.
Mermin, D.: 1998, ‘What is Quantum Mechanics Trying to Tell Us?’, American Journal of Physics 66, 753–767.
Neumann, von J.: 1955, Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Pauli, W.: 1994, Writings on Physics and Philosophy, C. P. Enz and K. von Meyenn (eds.), translated by R. Schlapp, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg.
Peres, A. and Zurek, W. H. : 1982, ‘Is Quantum Theory Universally Valid?’, American Journal of Physics 50, 807–810.
Popescu, S. and Rohrlich, D.: 1992, ‘Which States Violate Bell’s Inequality Maximally?’, Physics Letters A 169, 411–414.
Popper, K. R.: 1980, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Hutchinson, London.
Popper, K. R.: 1990, A World of Propensities, Thoemmes, Bristol.
Primas, H.: 1993, ‘The Cartesian Cut, the Heisenberg Cut, and Disentangled Observers’, in K. V. Laurikainen and C. Montonen (eds), Symposia on the Foundations of Modern Physics, World Scientific, Singapore, pp. 245–269.
Primas, H.: 1994, ‘Endo- and Exotheories of Matter’, in H. Atmanspacher and G. J. Dalenoort (eds.), Inside Versus Outside, Springer, Berlin, pp. 163–193.
Primas, H.: 1998, ‘Emergence in Exact Natural Sciences’, Acta Polytechnica Scandinavica Ma 91, 83–98.
Redhead, M.: 1995, From Physics to Metaphysics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Rovelli, C.: 1996, ‘Relational Quantum Mechanics’, International Journal of Theoretical Physics 35, 1637–1678.
Scheibe, E.: 1973, The Logical Analysis of Quantum Mechanics, Pergamon Press, Oxford.
Scheibe, E.: 1991, ‘Substances, Physical Systems, and Quantum Mechanics’, in G. Schurz and G.J.W. Dorn (eds.), Advances in Scientific Philosophy. Essays in Honour of Paul Weingartner, Rodopi, Amsterdam, pp. 215–229.
Scherer, H. and Busch, P.: 1993, ‘Problem of Signal Transmission via Quantum Correlations and Einstein Incompleteness in Quantum Mechanics’, Physical Review A 47, 1647–1651.
Schrödinger, E.: 1935a, ‘The Present Situation in Quantum Mechanics’, Naturwis-senschaften 22, 807–812, 823–828, 844–849. Reprinted in J. Wheeler and W. Zurek (eds.), 1983, Quantum Theory and Measurement, Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp. 152–167.
Schrödinger, E.: 1935b, ‘Discussion of Probability Relations Between Separated Systems’, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 31, 555–563.
Shimony, A.: 1986, ‘Events and Processes in the Quantum World’, in R. Penrose and C. Isham (eds.), Quantum Concepts in Space and Time, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 182–203.
Shimony, A.: 1990, ‘An Exposition of Bell’s Theorem’, in A. Miller (ed.), Sixty-Two Years of Uncertainty, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 33–43.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Karakostas, V. Forms of Quantum Nonseparability and Related Philosophical Consequences. J Gen Philos Sci 35, 283–312 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-004-0927-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-004-0927-6