A CHAPTER OF THE DEBATE BETWEEN REALISM AND ANTI-REALISM IN THE BEGINNINGS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS
Resumo
The purpose of this article is to present the debate established by realistic and anti-realist interpretations in the field of quantum mechanics. On the side of anti-realism, we chose Niels Bohr’s interpretation of complementarity given its precursor character, as well as because of the great influence it had on other orthodox interpretations of quantum mechanics. Known as Copenhagen interpretation, its anti realism is characterized, among other things, by conceiving the impossibility of the existence of entities that are not captured by the subject through measuring instruments. On the other hand, realistic interpretations conceive that such entities are real objects, whose existence is independent of the mind. Such interpretations arose in response to the anti realism of entities and were established for representing a counterpoint, as well as a rupture with the Copenhagen monocracy. We will present here as examples of this counterpoint: the EPR paradox, D. Bohm’s hidden variables, J. Bell’s inequalities and H. Everett’s relative states. In general terms, the purpose of this article is not to present the defense of a thesis, nor will we discuss in depth the arguments against the so-called Copenhagen interpretation. We will propose a presentation about the main interpretations that are contrary to the monocracy of the Copenhagen interpretation and we will deal with the developments that affected the fall of that same interpretation.
Downloads
Referências
BAKER, Joanne. 50 ideias de física quântica que você precisa conhecer. Trad. Rafael Garcia. São Paulo: Planeta, 2015.
BELL, J. On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen. Physics, 1, 1964, p. 195-200.
BEN-DOV, Y. Everett’s theory and the “many-worlds” interpretation. American Journal of Physics, v. 58, nº. 9, 1990. P. 829-832
BOHM, David. Quantum Theory. New York: Prentice-Hall, 1951.
BOHR, N. Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete? Physical Review, 48, Oct. 15, 1935. p. 695-702.
BOHR, N. Discussion with Einstein on Epistemological Problems in Atomic Physics. Foundations of Quantum Physics II (1933–1958). In: “Albert Einstein: Philosopher–Scientist”. (Ed. P.A. Schilpp), The Library of Living Philosophers, Vol. VII, Evanston, Illinois 1949, p. 201-241. Available in: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876050308703797?via%3Dihub. Access in: Jul. 12, 2020.
BOHR, N. The Quantum Postulate and the Recent Development of Atomic Theory. Supplement to “Nature”, April 14, 1928. p. 580-590. Available in: https://www.nature.com/articles/121580a0.pdf. Access in: Jul. 10, 2020.
BOHR, N. Os Átomos e o Conhecimento Humano. In:_____ Física Atômica e Conhecimento Humano: ensaios 1932-1957. Trad. Vera Ribeiro. Rio de Janeiro: Contraponto, 1995. p. 114-115
BUNGE, M. Física e Filosofia. Trad. Gita K. Guinsburg. São Paulo: Perspectiva, 2000. (Coleção Debates – Filosofia da Ciência)
DEWITT, B.S.; GRAHAM, N. The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1973.
EINSTEIN, A; PODOLSKY, B; ROSEN, N. Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? Physical Review, v. 47, May 15, 1935. p. 777-780.
EVERETT III, H. The Everett Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics: Collected Works 1955-1980 with Commentary. Edited by Jeffrey A. Barrett and Peter Byrne New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2012.
FREIRE JR., Olival. David Bohm e a controvérsia dos quanta. Campinas: Unicamp – Centro de Lógica, Epistemologia e História da Ciência, 1999. (Coleção CLE, v. 27)
FREITAS, Fábio Henrique de Alencar. Os Estados Relativos de Hugh Everett III: uma análise histórica e conceitual. 2007. 70 f. (Dissertação de mestrado – Programa de Pós-graduação em Ensino, Filosofia e História das Ciências) – Universidade Estadual de Feira de Santana, Feira de Santana/BA, 2007.
HEISENBERG. W. Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Science. Planned and Edited by Ruth Nanda Anshen. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1958.
HERBERT, N. Quantum Reality: beyond the new physics. Garden City: Anchor Press, 1985.
HOLTON, Gerald. The Roots of Complementarity. Daedalus, 99 (4), The Making of Modern Science: Biographical Studies, 1970. p. 151-197. Available in: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:37902465 Access in: Jul. 11, 2020.
HOWARD, D. 2004. Who Invented the “Copenhagen Interpretation”? A Study in Mythology. Philosophy of Science, 71, 2004, p. 669–82.
JAMMER, M. The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics: The Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics in Historical Perspective. Nova York: Wiley-Interscience Publication, 1974.
MEHLBERG, H. Philosophical Interpretations of Quantum Physics. In: _____ Time, Causality and the Quantum Theory. Reidel: Dordrecht, 1980. vol. 2. p. 3-74. (Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 19).
PESSOA JR., Osvaldo. Conceitos de Física Quântica. 4. ed. São Paulo: Editora Livraria da Física, 2019. Vols. I e II
PESSOA JR., Osvaldo. Mapa da Interpretações da Teoria Quântica. In: MARTINS, R. A.; BOIDO, G.; RODRÍGUEZ, V. (Orgs.), Física: Estudos Filosóficos e Históricos. Campinas: AFHIC, 2006. p. 119-152.
PESSOA JR., Osvaldo. Notas. In: BOHR, N. (1928) O Postulado Quântico e o Recente Desenvolvimento da Teoria Atômica. Trad. Osvaldo Pessoa Jr. In: Fundamentos de Física I – Simpósio David Bohm. Org. O. Pessoa Jr. São Paulo: Ed. Livraria da Física, 2000. p. 135-159.
PESSOA JR., Osvaldo. O Sujeito na Física Quântica. In: OLIVEIRA, E.C. (org.). Epistemologia, Lógica e Filosofia da Linguagem – Ensaios de Filosofia Contemporânea. Feira de Santana/BA: Núcleo de Estudos Filosóficos – UEFS, 2001. p. 157-96.
PESSOA JR., Osvaldo. Física Quântica: entenda as diversas interpretações da física quântica. 2007-2011. Disponível em: http://www2.uol.com.br/vyaestelar/fisicaquantica_artigos.htm. Acesso em: 08 maio 2020.
SCHRÖDINGER, E. Science and Humanism. With a foreword by Roger Penrose. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1951.
WHEELER, J. A.; ZUREK, W. H. (Orgs.). Quantum Theory and Measurement. New Jersey: Princeton Un. Press, 1983.