Why the future cannot be open in the quantum world
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2022.e84794Keywords:
open future, determinism, quantum mechanics, modal interpretationAbstract
In this study, I argue that the future is not open if quantum mechanics is complete. An open future means that the value observed when measuring a physical quantity in the future is not determined. At first glance, quantum mechanics seems to support the open future thesis, because it cannot always predict measurement value with certainty. However, many interpretations regard quantum mechanics as deterministic. These interpretations only suggest that the quantum mechanical world can be deterministic. I argue that, although quantum mechanics cannot predict the future with certainty, the quantum mechanical world must bedeterministic, and the value observed by the observer is determined. I examine the following two cases: (1) the wave-function completely describes the physical state and (2) the wave-function does not describe the physical state. Then, I argue that the future cannot be open in either case when quantum mechanics is complete.References
Barrett, J. 2006. A Quantum-Mechanical Argument for Mind-Body Dualism. Erkenntnis 64: 97–115. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27667853
Bohm, D. 1952a. A Suggested Interpretation of Quantum Theory in Terms of “Hidden Variables” Part I. Physical Review 85: 166–79. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.85.166
Bohm, D. 1952b. A Suggested Interpretation of Quantum Theory in Terms of “Hidden Variables” Part II. Physical Review 85: 180–93. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.85.180
Bohm, D. 1989. Quantum Theory. New York: Dover.
Calosi, C. & Wilson, J. 2019. Quantum Metaphysical Indeterminacy. Philosophical Studies 176: 2599–2627. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-018-1143-2
Darby, G. 2010. Quantum Mechanics and Metaphysical Indeterminacy. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88(2): 227–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048400903097786
Einstein, A.; Podolsky, B.; Rosen, N. 1935. Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?. Physical Review 47: 777–780. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.47.777
Fuchs, C. 2010. QBism, the Perimeter of Quantum Bayesianism. 26 March 2010, arXiv:1003.5209 [quant-ph].
Kochen, S. & Specker, E. 1967. The Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics. Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics 17: 59–87. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24902153
Lombardi, O. & Dieks, D.. 2017. Modal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. In: E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Spring 2017 Edition. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spring2017/entries/qm-modal/. Access: 20.12.2021
Morita, K. 2020. Did Bohr Succeed in Defending the Completeness of Quantum Mechanics? Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology 24(1): 51–63. https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2020v24n1p51
Myrvold, W. 2018. Philosophical Issues in Quantum Theory. In: E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Fall 2018 Edition. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2018/entries/qt-issues/. Access: 20.12.2021.
Skow, B. 2010. Deep Metaphysical Indeterminacy. The Philosophical Quarterly 60: 851–58. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40926801
Torza, A. 2017. Quantum Metaphysical Indeterminacy and Worldly Incompleteness. Synthese 88: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1581-y
van Fraassen, B. 1991. Quantum Mechanics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Wigner, E. 1961. Remarks on the Mind-Body Question. In J. Wheeler & W. Zurek (eds.), Quantum Theory and Measurement, p.168–181. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Kunihisa Morita
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Principia http://www.periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/index is licenced under a Creative Commons - Atribuição-Uso Não-Comercial-Não a obras derivadas 3.0 Unported.
Base available in www.periodicos.ufsc.br.
