On 4/27/2018 10:58 AM, [email protected] wrote:
On Friday, April 27, 2018 at 11:02:33 AM UTC, Bruce wrote:
From: *'scerir' via Everything List* <[email protected]
<javascript:>>
K. Camilleri wrote a very long paper about 'Constructing the Myth
of the Copenhagen Interpretation'. But there are many
**different** versions on-line.
https://philpapers.org/rec/CAMCTM <https://philpapers.org/rec/CAMCTM>
https://tinyurl.com/y9a9odek
He points out that the subjectivist view of the role of the
observer (consciousness) is a 'misconception' of the Copenhagen
Interpretation.
'Although Heisenberg did sometimes speak of a subjective element
in quantum physics, this should not be taken to mean that the
consciousness of the ‘observer’ plays a crucial roe lint eh
measurement interaction. In Physics and Philosophy in 1958,
Heisenberg argued that “the transition from the ‘possible’ to the
‘actual’ takes place during the act of observation” but this
transition occurs “applies to the physical, not the psychical act
of observation”. Only once the “interaction of the object with
the measuring device” has taken place can we speak of the
actualization, but here he was careful to point out that “it is
not connected with the act of registration of the result, by the
mind of observer” (Heisenberg, 1958, p. 54).'
'So where did this view come from? And how did this view come to
be associated with the likes of Bohr and Heisenberg? Scholars
have often traced this view to von Neumann’s analysis of
measurement in his Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik
published in 1932 (von Neumann, 1955). Whereas in Bohr’s
complementarity, the measurement device is described using the
concepts of classical physics, and not according to the laws of
quantum mechanics, in von Neumann’s presentation, the measurement
device is given a quantum-mechanical treatment (Bub, 1995).
According to von Neumann’s formal treatment of the problem, when
we observe a quantum system, there is an instantaneous change of
the wave function in Hilbert space – it collapses – a process
which is not described by the Schrödinger equation. Precisely
what von Neumann’s philosophical views on this matter were is
more difficult to judge, though as Becker and Gavroglou have
observed there is no evidence of him endorsing a realist view of
the wave function, nor does he make any explicit reference to the
need to introduce the consciousness of the observer in the
measuring chain (Becker, 2004; Gavroglou, 1995, p. 171).Rather it
was the 1939 monograph La Théorie de l’Observation en Méchanique
Quantique by London and Bauer which we find the first explicit
mention of the claim that the reduction of the wave function was
the result of the conscious activity of the human mind (French,
2002).'
etc etc
Interesting..... I have often thought that Bohr and Heisenberg
were not quite the monsters of positivism that they are often
painted as these days. In fact, I would suggest that the
prevalence of decoherence means that a case can be made that
everything is, in practice, classical, and that the quantum only
shows itself reluctantly in the small and the isolated. Whether
that means that the classical is prior -- essential for
understanding the quantum -- is something that can be argued
about. But I do not think that such an idea is entirely silly, and
nor can it just be dismissed out-of-hand.
The world we know and experience is classical, after all. Else we,
as classical beings, could not experience it!
Bruce
It seems Von Neumann is the culprit. See
http://www.informationphilosopher.com/introduction/physics/heisenberg_cut.html
Scroll down to paragraph 6. Extensive von Neumann quote on this issue. AG
I think Schroedinger and his cat bear some responsibility. In trying to
debunk Born's probabilistic interpretation he appealed to the absurdity
of observation changing the physical state...even though no one had
actually proposed that.
Brent
Ms Schroedinger: What happened to that poor cat? It looks half dead.
Erwin: I don't know. Ask Wigner.
Eugene: I just looked in and it collapsed.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
