Abstract
The standard interpretation of quantum physics (QP) and some recent generalizations of this theory rest on the adoption of a rerificationist theory of truth and meaning, while most proposals for modifying and interpreting QP in a “realistic” way attribute an ontological status to theoretical physical entities (ontological realism). Both terms of this dichotomy are criticizable, and many quantum paradoxes can be attributed to it. We discuss a new viewpoint in this paper (semantic realism, or briefly SR), which applies both to classical physics (CP) and to QP. and is characterized by the attempt of giving up verificationism without adopting ontological realism. As a first step, we construct a formalized observative language L endowed with a correspondence truth theory. Then, we state a set of axioms by means of L which hold both in CP and in QP. and construct a further language Lv which can express bothtestable andtheoretical properties of a given physical system. The concepts ofmeaning andtestability do not collapse in L and Le hence we can distinguish between semantic and pragmatic compatibility of physical properties and define the concepts of testability and conjoint testability of statements of L and Le. In this context a new metatheoretical principle (MGP) is stated, which limits the validity of empirical physical laws. By applying SR (in particular. MGP) to QP, one can interpret quantum logic as a theory of testability in QP, show that QP is semantically incomplete, and invalidate the widespread claim that contextuality is unavoidable in QP. Furthermore. SR introduces some changes in the conventional interpretation of ideal measurements and Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
C. Garola. “Classical foundations of quantum logic.”Int. J. Theor. Phys. 30. 1 (1991).
C. Garola. “Semantic incompleteness of quantum physics.”Int. J. Theor. Phys. 31. 809 (1992).
C. Garola. “Quantum logics seen as quantum testability theories.”Int. J. Theor. Phys. 31. 1639 (1992).
C. Garola. “Truth versus testability in quantum logic.”Erkenntnis 37. 197 (1992).
C. Garola. “Semantic incompleteness of quantum physics and EPR-like paradoxes.”Int. J. Theor. Phys. 32. 1863 (1993).
C. Garola. “Reconciling local realism and quantum physics: a critique to Bell.”Theor. Mat. Fiz 99. 285 (1994).
C. Garola. “Criticizing Bell: Local realism and quantum physics reconciled.”Int. J. Theor. Phys. 34. 269 (1995).
C. Garola. “Questioning nonlocality: an operational critique to Bell’s theorem.” inThe Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Historical Analysis and Open Questions. C. Garola and A. Rossi, eds. (Kluwer Academic. Dordrecht. 1995). p. 273.
C. Garola. “Pragmatic versus semantic contextuality in quantum physics.”Int. J. Theor. Phys. 34. 1383 (1995).
A. Einstein. B. Podolsky. and N. Rosen. “Can quantum mechanical description of reality be considered complete?.”Phys. Rev. 47. 777 (1935).
N. Bohr.Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge (Wiley. New York. 1958).
N. Bohr.Essays 1958 1962 on Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge (Wiley. New York. 1963).
W. Heisenberg.The Physical Principles of Quantum Theory (Dover, New York. 1930).
B. C. Van Fraassen. “A modal interpretation of quantum mechanics.” inCurrent Issues in Quantum Logic. E. G. Beltrametti and B. C. Van Fraassen. eds. (Plenum. New York. 1981).
R. B. Braithwaite.Scientific Explanation (Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. 1953).
C. C. Hempel.Aspects of Scientific Explanation (Free Press. New York. 1965).
B. Russell.An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth (Allen & Unwin. London. 1940).
R. Carnap. “Truth and confirmation.” inReadings in Philosophical Analysis. H. Feigl and W. Sellars. eds. (Appleton-Century-Crofts. New York. 1949).
R. Carnap.Philosophical Foundations of Physics (Basic Books. New York 1966).
K. R. Popper.Conjectures and Refutations (Routledge & Kegan Paul. London. 1969).
P. Bush. P. J. Lathi. and P. Mittelstaedt.The Quantum Theory of Measurement (Springer. Berlin. 1991).
G. Birkhoff and J. von Neumann. “The logic of quantum mechanics.”Ann. Math. 37. 823 (1936).
A. Tarski. “The semantic conception of truth and the foundations of semantics.” inSemantics and the Philosophy of Language L. Linsky. ed. (University of Illinois Press. Urbana. 1952).
C. Dalla Pozza and C. Garola. “A pragmatic interpretation of intuitionistic propositional logic.”Erkenntnis 43. 81 (1995).
M. Jammer.The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics (Wiley. New York. 1974).
H. Reichenbach.Philosophic Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (University of California Press. Los Angeles. 1965).
J. S. Bell. “On the problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics.”Rev. Mod. Phys.38. 447 (1966).
S. Kochen and E. P. Specker. “The problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics.”J. Math. Mech. 17. 59 (1967).
N. D. Mermin. “Hidden variables and the two theorems of John Bell.”Rev. Mod. Phys.65. 803 (1993).
J. S. Bell. “On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox.”Physics 1. 195 (1964).
E. P. Wigner. “On hidden variables and quantum mechanical probabilities.”Am. J. Phys.38. 1005 (1970).
F. Selleri. “History of the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox.” inQuantum Mechanics Versus Local Realism. F. Selleri. ed. (Plenum. New York. 1988). p. 1.
D. M. Greenberger. M. A. Horne. A. Shimony. and A. Zeilinger. “Bell’s theorem without inequalities.”Am. J. Phys. 58. 1131 (1990).
R. K. Clifton, M. L. G. Redhead, and J. M. Butterfield, “Generalization of the Greenberger Horne Zeilinger algebraic proof of nonlocality.”Found. Phys. 21. 149 (1991).
J. J. Sakurai,Modern Quatum Mechanics (Benjamin. Reading. Massachusetts. 1985).
C. Garola and L. Solombrino. “Semantic realism versus EPR-like paradoxes: the Furry, Bohm-Aharonov. and Bell paradoxes.”Found. Phys. 26. 1329 (1996).
B. D’Espagnat,Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Benjamin, Reading. Massachusetts. 1976).
W. M. De Muynck. W. De Baere, and H. Martens. “Interpretation of quantum mechanics, joint measurements of incompatible observables, and counterfactual definiteness.”Found. Phys. 24. 1589 (1994).
H. P. Stapp. “Comments on ‘Interpretation of quantum mechanics, joint measurement of incompatible observables and counterfactual definiteness’.”Found. Phys. 24. 1665 (1995).
D. Aerts. “Description of many physical entities without the paradoxes encountered in quantum mechanics.”Found. Phys. 12. 1131 (1982).
D. Foulis, C. Piron. C. Randall. “Realism, operationalism and quantum mechanics.”Found. Phys. 13. 813 (1983).
G. Ludwig,Foundations of Quantum Mechanics I (Springer. New York. 1983).
C. Piron.Foundations of Quantum Physics (Benjamin, Reading. Massachusetts. 1976).
C. Garola. “Embedding of posets into lattices in quantum logic.”Int. J. Theor. Phys. 24. 423 (1985).
K. Bugajska and S. Bugajski. “The lattice structure of quantum logics.”Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré XIX. 333 (1973).
G. M. Mackey.The Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Benjamin. New York. 1963).
J. M. Jauch.Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Addison Wesley. Reading, Massachusetts. 1968).
C. Garola “Propositions and orthocomplementation in quantum logic.”Int. J. Theor. Phys. 19. 369 (1980).
C. Garola and L. Solombrino. “Yes-no experiments and ordered structures in quantum physics,”Nuovo Cimento 77B. 87 (1983).
G. Cattaneo, C. Dalla Pozza. C. Garola. and G. Nisticó, “On the logical foundations of the Jauch-Piron approach to quantum physics.”Int. J. Theor. Phys. 27. 1313 (1988).
G. Cattaneo, C. Garola, and C. Nisticó, “Preparation-effects versus question-preparation structures.”J. Phys. Ess. 2. 197 (1989).
D. Dieks. “Quantum mechanics without the projection postulate and its realistic interpretation.”Found. Phys. 19. 1397 (1989).
K. Gottfried. “Does quantum mechanics carry the seeds of its own destruction?.”Phys. Worlds 4 (10). 34 (1991).
J. Bub. “Quantum mechanics without the projection postulate,”Found. Phys. 22. 737 (1992).
G. Cattaneo and G. Nisticó, “Interpretative remarks in quantum mechanics.” inThe Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Historical Analysis and Open Questions. C. Garola and A. Rossi. eds. (Kluwer Academic. Dordrecht. 1995). p. 127.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Garola, C., Solombrino, L. The theoretical apparatus of semantic realism: A new language for classical and quantum physics. Found Phys 26, 1121–1164 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02275624
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02275624