See more infophilosopher:
|
|
|
Core Concepts
Abduction Belief Best Explanation Cause Certainty Chance Coherence Correspondence Decoherence Divided Line Downward Causation Emergence Emergent Dualism ERR Identity Theory Infinite Regress Information Intension/Extension Intersubjectivism Justification Materialism Meaning Mental Causation Multiple Realizability Naturalism Necessity Possible Worlds Postmodernism Probability Realism Reductionism Schrödinger's Cat Supervenience Truth Universals Philosophers Mortimer Adler Rogers Albritton Alexander of Aphrodisias Samuel Alexander William Alston Anaximander G.E.M.Anscombe Anselm Louise Antony Thomas Aquinas Aristotle David Armstrong Harald Atmanspacher Robert Audi Augustine J.L.Austin A.J.Ayer Alexander Bain Mark Balaguer Jeffrey Barrett William Belsham Henri Bergson George Berkeley Isaiah Berlin Richard J. Bernstein Bernard Berofsky Robert Bishop Max Black Susanne Bobzien Emil du Bois-Reymond Hilary Bok Laurence BonJour George Boole Émile Boutroux F.H.Bradley C.D.Broad Michael Burke C.A.Campbell Joseph Keim Campbell Rudolf Carnap Carneades Ernst Cassirer David Chalmers Roderick Chisholm Chrysippus Cicero Randolph Clarke Samuel Clarke Anthony Collins Antonella Corradini Diodorus Cronus Jonathan Dancy Donald Davidson Mario De Caro Democritus Daniel Dennett Jacques Derrida René Descartes Richard Double Fred Dretske John Dupré John Earman Laura Waddell Ekstrom Epictetus Epicurus Herbert Feigl John Martin Fischer Owen Flanagan Luciano Floridi Philippa Foot Alfred Fouilleé Harry Frankfurt Richard L. Franklin Michael Frede Gottlob Frege Peter Geach Edmund Gettier Carl Ginet Alvin Goldman Gorgias Nicholas St. John Green H.Paul Grice Ian Hacking Ishtiyaque Haji Stuart Hampshire W.F.R.Hardie Sam Harris William Hasker R.M.Hare Georg W.F. Hegel Martin Heidegger Heraclitus R.E.Hobart Thomas Hobbes David Hodgson Shadsworth Hodgson Baron d'Holbach Ted Honderich Pamela Huby David Hume Ferenc Huoranszki William James Lord Kames Robert Kane Immanuel Kant Tomis Kapitan Jaegwon Kim William King Hilary Kornblith Christine Korsgaard Saul Kripke Andrea Lavazza Keith Lehrer Gottfried Leibniz Leucippus Michael Levin George Henry Lewes C.I.Lewis David Lewis Peter Lipton C. Lloyd Morgan John Locke Michael Lockwood E. Jonathan Lowe John R. Lucas Lucretius Alasdair MacIntyre Ruth Barcan Marcus James Martineau Storrs McCall Hugh McCann Colin McGinn Michael McKenna Brian McLaughlin John McTaggart Paul E. Meehl Uwe Meixner Alfred Mele Trenton Merricks John Stuart Mill Dickinson Miller G.E.Moore Thomas Nagel Otto Neurath Friedrich Nietzsche John Norton P.H.Nowell-Smith Robert Nozick William of Ockham Timothy O'Connor Parmenides David F. Pears Charles Sanders Peirce Derk Pereboom Steven Pinker Plato Karl Popper Porphyry Huw Price H.A.Prichard Protagoras Hilary Putnam Willard van Orman Quine Frank Ramsey Ayn Rand Michael Rea Thomas Reid Charles Renouvier Nicholas Rescher C.W.Rietdijk Richard Rorty Josiah Royce Bertrand Russell Paul Russell Gilbert Ryle Jean-Paul Sartre Kenneth Sayre T.M.Scanlon Moritz Schlick Arthur Schopenhauer John Searle Wilfrid Sellars Alan Sidelle Ted Sider Henry Sidgwick Walter Sinnott-Armstrong J.J.C.Smart Saul Smilansky Michael Smith Baruch Spinoza L. Susan Stebbing Isabelle Stengers George F. Stout Galen Strawson Peter Strawson Eleonore Stump Francisco Suárez Richard Taylor Kevin Timpe Mark Twain Peter Unger Peter van Inwagen Manuel Vargas John Venn Kadri Vihvelin Voltaire G.H. von Wright David Foster Wallace R. Jay Wallace W.G.Ward Ted Warfield Roy Weatherford William Whewell Alfred North Whitehead David Widerker David Wiggins Bernard Williams Timothy Williamson Ludwig Wittgenstein Susan Wolf Scientists Michael Arbib Walter Baade Bernard Baars Gregory Bateson John S. Bell Charles Bennett Ludwig von Bertalanffy Susan Blackmore Margaret Boden David Bohm Niels Bohr Ludwig Boltzmann Emile Borel Max Born Satyendra Nath Bose Walther Bothe Hans Briegel Leon Brillouin Stephen Brush Henry Thomas Buckle S. H. Burbury Donald Campbell Anthony Cashmore Eric Chaisson Jean-Pierre Changeux Arthur Holly Compton John Conway John Cramer E. P. Culverwell Charles Darwin Richard Dawkins Terrence Deacon Lüder Deecke Louis de Broglie Max Delbrück Abraham de Moivre Paul Dirac Hans Driesch John Eccles Arthur Stanley Eddington Paul Ehrenfest Albert Einstein Hugh Everett, III Franz Exner Richard Feynman R. A. Fisher Joseph Fourier Philipp Frank Lila Gatlin Michael Gazzaniga GianCarlo Ghirardi J. Willard Gibbs Nicolas Gisin Paul Glimcher Thomas Gold A.O.Gomes Brian Goodwin Joshua Greene Jacques Hadamard Patrick Haggard Stuart Hameroff Augustin Hamon Sam Harris Hyman Hartman John-Dylan Haynes Donald Hebb Martin Heisenberg Werner Heisenberg John Herschel Art Hobson Jesper Hoffmeyer E. T. Jaynes William Stanley Jevons Roman Jakobson Pascual Jordan Ruth E. Kastner Stuart Kauffman Martin J. Klein Simon Kochen Hans Kornhuber Stephen Kosslyn Ladislav Kovàč Rolf Landauer Alfred Landé Pierre-Simon Laplace David Layzer Benjamin Libet Seth Lloyd Hendrik Lorentz Josef Loschmidt Ernst Mach Donald MacKay Henry Margenau James Clerk Maxwell Ernst Mayr John McCarthy Ulrich Mohrhoff Jacques Monod Emmy Noether Abraham Pais Howard Pattee Wolfgang Pauli Massimo Pauri Roger Penrose Steven Pinker Colin Pittendrigh Max Planck Susan Pockett Henri Poincaré Daniel Pollen Ilya Prigogine Hans Primas Adolphe Quételet Juan Roederer Jerome Rothstein David Ruelle Erwin Schrödinger Aaron Schurger Claude Shannon David Shiang Herbert Simon Dean Keith Simonton B. F. Skinner Roger Sperry John Stachel Henry Stapp Tom Stonier Antoine Suarez Leo Szilard Max Tegmark William Thomson (Kelvin) Peter Tse Vlatko Vedral Heinz von Foerster John von Neumann John B. Watson Daniel Wegner Steven Weinberg Paul A. Weiss John Wheeler Wilhelm Wien Norbert Wiener Eugene Wigner E. O. Wilson H. Dieter Zeh Ernst Zermelo Wojciech Zurek Konrad Zuse Fritz Zwicky Presentations Biosemiotics Free Will Mental Causation James Symposium |
Schrödinger's Cat (and Wigner's Friend)
To understand and resolve the paradox of Schrödinger's Cat, it helps to understand that Erwin Schrödinger invented his paradox to poke holes in some implications of quantum physics that he regarded as unacceptable. Like Albert Einstein, Max Planck, and others prominent in the new physics, Schrödinger disliked the indeterminacy, the element of chance and apparent loss of strict causality, in quantum mechanics.
Schrödinger's diabolical thought experiment was designed to amplify microscopic quantum uncertainty into the macroscopic world.
The I-PHI key to dissolving the paradox is to focus on the information present at each time in the experiment.
In standard quantum theory, an isolated system is prepared in a known state at time t. This consists of making a quantum measurement on the system and finding the experimental value for some observable quantity S(t). The future development of the system is completely described by a time evolution operator H(t) which yields a complex probability function ψ(t). This is the "wave function" invented by Schrödinger, whose formulation of quantum mechanics is called wave mechanics.
Without any further observation, the best knowledge we have of the system state at later times depends on the (real) square of this (complex) probability amplitude function. If there are a finite number of states, we can calculate the probability of finding the system in each state. Schrödinger's thought experiment imagines two possible states for the cat, alive and dead. His ghoulish Geiger counter apparatus is arranged to have a fifty percent chance of detecting an unpredictable radioactive decay and releasing cyanide to kill the cat in one hour.
So what is known, what information exists in the world, at that time one hour into the experiment?
For an external observer, complete knowledge is the paradoxical superposition of the two ψ-functions for live and dead cats. If we really did this fiendish experiment many times, our estimated probabilities would agree very well with the total observed outcomes.
But what about the cat as a participant observer? For example, if the cat is killed one minute into the experiment, information will be encoded in the universe, information that can be read later in the cat's autopsy. The collapse of the wave function when the atom decayed could also have been registered on a chart recorder monitoring the Geiger counter electrical output.
More details on Schrödinger's Cat is in the Experiments section.
These are two examples of how the physical universe can be its own observer. Whenever information is encoded in information structures, we do not need the consciousness of physicists to collapse the wave function and make up the mind of the universe, as Werner Heisenberg, Eugene Wigner, John Wheeler, and others speculated.
In his "Remarks on the Mind-Body Question," Wigner imagines a friend who performs an experiment (it was a randomly generated flash of light, but it could be a Schrödinger's cat experiment) while Wigner is out of the room. When Wigner comes into the room, he learns the outcome. During the time only his friend knew, he wonders whether the state of the system is a superposition of "flash seen" and "flash not seen," or was it known at some previous point?
Clearly the most Wigner could know would be the probabilities he would calculate from the "flash seen" and "flash not seen" wave functions. But equally clearly, Wigner sees that the wave functions have collapsed, since the information has already been encoded in the mind of his friend.
He then substitutes a machine for his friend and decides that the situation is again indeterminate, with just a much larger box. Now it is his consciousness that collapses the wave function. He concludes (incorrectly) not only that mind is necessary to observe the physical universe, but also that mind is not material, a strange contribution to the classic mind-body problem.
For Teachers
For Scholars
Erwin Schrödinger's thought experiment:
One can even set up quite ridiculous cases. A cat is penned up in a steel chamber, along with the following device (which must be secured against direct interference by the cat): in a Geiger counter there is a tiny bit of radioactive substance, so small, that perhaps in the course of the hour one of the atoms decays, but also, with equal probability, perhaps none; if it happens, the counter tube discharges and through a relay releases a hammer which shatters a small flask of hydrocyanic acid. If one has left this entire system to itself for an hour, one would say that the cat still lives if meanwhile no atom has decayed. The psi-function of the entire system would express this by having in it the living and dead cat (pardon the expression) mixed or smeared out in equal parts. It is typical of these cases that an indeterminacy originally restricted to the atomic domain becomes transformed into macroscopic indeterminacy, which can then be resolved by direct observation. That prevents us from so naively accepting as valid a "blurred model" for representing reality. In itself it would not embody anything unclear or contradictory. There is a difference between a shaky or out-of-focus photograph and a snapshot of clouds and fog banks.
Eugene Wigner's Consciousness:
When the province of physical theory was extended to encompass microscopic phenomena, through the creation of quantum mechanics, the concept of consciousness came to the fore again: it was not possible to formulate the laws of quantum mechanics without reference to the consciousness. All that quantum mechanics purports to describe are probability connections between subsequent impressions (also called ‘apperceptions’) of consciousness, and even though the dividing line between the observer, whose consciousness is being affected, and the observed physical object can be shifted towards one or the other to a considerable degree, it cannot be eliminated.
Werner Heisenberg's comments on knowledge of the observer:
The laws of nature which we formulate mathematically in quantum theory deal no longer with the particles themselves but with our knowledge of the elementary particles. The conception of objective reality … evaporated into the … mathematics that represents no longer the behavior of elementary particles but rather our knowledge of this behavior.
|
