DOCSLIB.ORG

A Clifford Algebraic Analysis Gives Mathematical Explanation Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Clifford Algebraic Analysis Gives Mathematical Explanation Of World Journal of Neuroscience, 2013, 3, 157-170 WJNS http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/wjns.2013.33021 Published Online August 2013 (http://www.scirp.org/journal/wjns/) A Clifford algebraic analysis gives mathematical explanation of quantization of quantum theory and delineates a model of quantum reality in which information, primitive cognition entities and a principle of existence are * intrinsically represented ab initio Elio Conte1,2 1School of International Advanced Studies on Applied Theoretical and Non Linear Methodologies of Physics, Bari, Italy 2Department of Neurosciences and Sense Organs, University of Bari “Aldo Moro”, Bari, Italy Email: [email protected] Received 7 April 2013; revised 20 May 2013; accepted 24 June 2013 Copyright © 2013 Elio Conte. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. ABSTRACT tistics of subatomic particles. Finally, the Copenhagen interpretation became widely accepted but with profound The thesis of this paper is that Information, Cognition reservations of some distinguished scientists and, in par- and a Principle of Existence are intrinsically struc- ticular, A. Einstein who prospected the general and al- tured in the quantum model of reality. We reach such ternative view point of the hidden variables, originating a evidence by using the Clifford algebra. We analyze quantization in some traditional cases of quantum large debate about the conceptual foundations of the the- mechanics and, in particular in quantum harmonic ory that has received in the past years renewed strength- oscillator, orbital angular momentum and hydrogen ening with Bell theorem [1], and still continues in the atom. The results are confirmed analyzing human present days. By 1930, quantum mechanics was further cognition behavior that evidences a very consistent unified and formalized by the work of David Hilbert, agreement with the basic quantum mechanical foun- Paul Dirac and John von Neumann, [2] with a greater dations. emphasis placed on measurement in quantum mechanics, the nature of reality and of its knowledge, involving the Keywords: Information; Quantum Cognition; Principle debate also a large body of epistemological and philoso- of Existence; Quantum Mechanics; Quantization; phical interest. Another feature that has always charac- Clifford Algebra; Cognitive Sciences terized the debate on quantum mechanics has been that one to identify what is the best mathematics that we should use in order to prospect quantum reality. 1. INTRODUCTION Conventionally formulated quantum mechanics starts The earliest versions of quantum mechanics were for- always with the combined standard mathematical, well mulated in the first decade of the 20th century following known, description from one hand and the use of classi- about the same time the basic discoveries of physics as cal physical analogies on the other hand. the atomic theory and the corpuscular theory of light that Our position is that by this way we risk to negate the was basically updated by Einstein. Early quantum theory fundamental nature of quantum reality that is fixed on was significantly reformulated in the mid-1920s by Werner some basic and unclassical features. They are the integer Heisenberg, Max Born and Pascual Jordan, who created quanta, the non commutation, the intrinsic-irreducible matrix mechanics, Louis de Broglie and Erwin Schrod- intedeterminism and quantum interference. It is possible inger who introduced wave mechanics, and Wolfgang to demonstrate that quantization, non commutation, intrin- Pauli and Satyendra Nath Bose who introduced the sta- sic and irreducible indetermination, and quantum inter- ference may be also obtained in a rough scheme due to *A preliminary and partial version of the present paper, based on the mathematical and physical foundations, is going to be published on the outset of the basic axioms of Clifford algebra. NeuroQuantology and on Advanced Studies in Theoretical Physics. First, let us follow the illuminating thinking of P. OPEN ACCESS 158 E. Conte / World Journal of Neuroscience 3 (2013) 157-170 Dirac. of a quantum system plus measuring apparatus devel- As previously said, P. A. M. Dirac contributed at the oped at the order n = 4 of the considered Clifford alge- highest level to the final formulation of quantum me- bras and of the corresponding density matrix in standard chanics. In his “The Development of Quantum Theory” quantum mechanics. In each of such cases examined, we [3] and “History of Twentieth Century Physics” [4], he found that the passage from the algebra Si to Ni,1 , wrote: considered during the quantum measurement of the sys- “I saw that non commutation was really the dominant tem, actually describes the collapse of the wave function. characteristic of Heisenberg’s new theory. It was really Therefore we concluded that the actual quantum meas- more important than Heisenberg’s idea of building up the urement has as counterpart in the Clifford algebraic de- theory in terms of quantities closely connected with ex- scription, the passage from the Si to the Ni,1 Clifford perimental results. So I was led to concentrate on the algebras, reaching in this manner the objective to refor- idea of non commutation. I was dealing with these new mulate von Neumann postulate on quantum measurement variables, the quantum variables, and they seemed to be and proposing a self-consistent formulation of quantum some very mysterious physical quantities and I invented theory. We reached also another objective. The com- a new word to describe them. I called them q-numbers bined use of the Si Clifford algebra and the Ni,1 di- and the ordinary variables of mathematics I called c- hedral Clifford algebra, also accomplishes to another numbers to distinguish them… Then I proceed to build basic requirement that the advent of quantum mechanics up a theory of these q-numbers. Now, I did not know strongly outlined. Heisenberg initial view point was to anything about the real nature of these q-numbers. Heisen- modify substantially our manner to look at the reality. He berg’s matrices, I thought, were just an example of q- replaced numbers by actions as also outlined by Stapp numbers, may be q-numbers were really something more [7]; a number represents the manner in which the dy- general. All that I knew about q-numbers was that they namics of a given object has happened. Heisenberg re- obeyed an algebra satisfying the ordinary axioms except placed such standard view point requiring instead that we for the commutative axiom of multiplication. I did not have to explicit the mathematical action (let us remember bother at all about finding a precise mathematical nature that the notion of operator will be subsequently adopted), of q-numbers”. and this action becomes the mathematical counterpart of Our approach may be reassumed as it follows. the physical corresponding action whose outcome will Initiating with 2010 [5,6] we started giving proof of give a number as final determination. Such double fea- two existing Clifford algebras, the Si that has isomor- tures of standard quantum mechanics represent of course phism with that one of Pauli matrices and the Ni,1 a basic and conceptually profound innovation in our where Ni stands for the dihedral Clifford algebra. manner to conceive reality and the methodology to in- The salient feature is that we showed that the Ni,1 vestigate it. It is clearly synthesized in our Clifford alge- may be obtained from the Si algebra when we attribute braic formulation by using from one hand the Clifford a numerical value (+1 or −1) to one of the basic elements Si and, as counterpart, the Ni,1 dihedral Clifford al- eee123,, of the Si . We utilized such result to advance gebra. a criterium under which the Si algebra has as counter- Generally speaking, our general position is that quan- part the description of quantum systems that in standard tization, non commutation, intrinsic-irreducible indeter- quantum mechanics are considered in absence of obser- mination and quantum variables as new “mysterious vation and quantum measurement while the Ni,1 attend physical quantities”, also if in a rough scheme, may be when a quantum measurement is performed on such sys- actually described and due to the outset of the basic axi- tem with advent of wave function collapse. oms of Clifford algebra. This is the reason because we The physical content of the criterium is that the quan- started in 1972 to attempt to formulate a bare bone skele- tum measurement and wave function collapse induce the ton of quantum mechanics by using Clifford algebra and passage in the considered quantum system from the Si on this basis we have obtained also some other interest- to Ni,1 or to the Ni,1 algebras, where each algebra ing results. Rather recently, as example, we have ob- has of course its proper rules of commutation. On this tained a very interesting feature that could be related to basis we re-examined the von Neumann postulate on quantum reality. It is well known that J. von Neumann [2] quantum measurement, and we gave a proper justifica- constructed a matrix logic on the basis of quantum me- tion of such postulate by using the Si . algebra. We also chanics. In [8-10] we inverted the demonstration, we studied some direct applications of the above mentioned showed that quantum mechanics may be constructed criterium to some cases of interest in standard quantum from logic. This feature may represent a turning point. In mechanics, analyzing in particular a two state quantum fact, the evidence is that we have indication about the system, the case of time dependent interaction of such logical origin of quantum mechanics and by this way we system with a measuring apparatus and finally the case are induced to conclude that quantum reality has intrin- Copyright © 2013 SciRes.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 6. Knowledge, Information, and Entropy the Book John Von
    6. Knowledge, Information, and Entropy The book John von Neumann and the Foundations of Quantum Physics contains a fascinating and informative article written by Eckehart Kohler entitled “Why von Neumann Rejected Carnap’s Dualism of Information Concept.” The topic is precisely the core issue before us: How is knowledge connected to physics? Kohler illuminates von Neumann’s views on this subject by contrasting them to those of Carnap. Rudolph Carnap was a distinguished philosopher, and member of the Vienna Circle. He was in some sense a dualist. He had studied one of the central problems of philosophy, namely the distinction between analytic statements and synthetic statements. (The former are true or false by virtue of a specified set of rules held in our minds, whereas the latter are true or false by virtue their concordance with physical or empirical facts.) His conclusions had led him to the idea that there are two different domains of truth, one pertaining to logic and mathematics and the other to physics and the natural sciences. This led to the claim that there are “Two Concepts of Probability,” one logical the other physical. That conclusion was in line with the fact that philosophers were then divided between two main schools as to whether probability should be understood in terms of abstract idealizations or physical sequences of outcomes of measurements. Carnap’s bifurcations implied a similar division between two different concepts of information, and of entropy. In 1952 Carnap was working at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton and about to publish a work on his dualistic theory of information, according to which epistemological concepts like information should be treated separately from physics.
    [Show full text]
  • Are Information, Cognition and the Principle of Existence Intrinsically
    Adv. Studies Theor. Phys., Vol. 7, 2013, no. 17, 797 - 818 HIKARI Ltd, www.m-hikari.com http://dx.doi.org/10.12988/astp.2013.3318 Are Information, Cognition and the Principle of Existence Intrinsically Structured in the Quantum Model of Reality? Elio Conte(1,2) and Orlando Todarello(2) (1)School of International Advanced Studies on Applied Theoretical and non Linear Methodologies of Physics, Bari, Italy (2)Department of Neurosciences and Sense Organs University of Bari “Aldo Moro”, Bari, Italy Copyright © 2013 Elio Conte and Orlando Todarello. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract The thesis of this paper is that Information, Cognition and a Principle of Existence are intrinsically structured in the quantum model of reality. We reach such evidence by using the Clifford algebra. We analyze quantization in some traditional cases of quantum mechanics and, in particular in quantum harmonic oscillator, orbital angular momentum and hydrogen atom. Keywords: information, quantum cognition, principle of existence, quantum mechanics, quantization, Clifford algebra. Corresponding author: [email protected] Introduction The earliest versions of quantum mechanics were formulated in the first decade of the 20th century following about the same time the basic discoveries of physics as 798 Elio Conte and Orlando Todarello the atomic theory and the corpuscular theory of light that was basically updated by Einstein. Early quantum theory was significantly reformulated in the mid- 1920s by Werner Heisenberg, Max Born and Pascual Jordan, who created matrix mechanics, Louis de Broglie and Erwin Schrodinger who introduced wave mechanics, and Wolfgang Pauli and Satyendra Nath Bose who introduced the statistics of subatomic particles.
    [Show full text]
  • Seven Principles of Quantum Mechanics
    Seven Principles of Quantum Mechanics Igor V. Volovich Steklov Mathematical Institute Russian Academy of Sciences Gubkin St. 8, 117966, GSP-1, Moscow, Russia e-mail: [email protected] Abstract The list of basic axioms of quantum mechanics as it was formulated by von Neu- mann includes only the mathematical formalism of the Hilbert space and its statistical interpretation. We point out that such an approach is too general to be considered as the foundation of quantum mechanics. In particular in this approach any finite- dimensional Hilbert space describes a quantum system. Though such a treatment might be a convenient approximation it can not be considered as a fundamental de- scription of a quantum system and moreover it leads to some paradoxes like Bell’s theorem. I present a list from seven basic postulates of axiomatic quantum mechan- ics. In particular the list includes the axiom describing spatial properties of quantum system. These axioms do not admit a nontrivial realization in the finite-dimensional Hilbert space. One suggests that the axiomatic quantum mechanics is consistent with local realism. arXiv:quant-ph/0212126v1 22 Dec 2002 1 INTRODUCTION Most discussions of foundations and interpretations of quantum mechanics take place around the meaning of probability, measurements, reduction of the state and entanglement. The list of basic axioms of quantum mechanics as it was formulated by von Neumann [1] includes only general mathematical formalism of the Hilbert space and its statistical interpre- tation, see also [2]-[6]. From this point of view any mathematical proposition on properties of operators in the Hilbert space can be considered as a quantum mechanical result.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Order 13978 of January 18, 2021
    6809 Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 86, No. 13 Friday, January 22, 2021 Title 3— Executive Order 13978 of January 18, 2021 The President Building the National Garden of American Heroes By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Background. In Executive Order 13934 of July 3, 2020 (Building and Rebuilding Monuments to American Heroes), I made it the policy of the United States to establish a statuary park named the National Garden of American Heroes (National Garden). To begin the process of building this new monument to our country’s greatness, I established the Interagency Task Force for Building and Rebuilding Monuments to American Heroes (Task Force) and directed its members to plan for construction of the National Garden. The Task Force has advised me it has completed the first phase of its work and is prepared to move forward. This order revises Executive Order 13934 and provides additional direction for the Task Force. Sec. 2. Purpose. The chronicles of our history show that America is a land of heroes. As I announced during my address at Mount Rushmore, the gates of a beautiful new garden will soon open to the public where the legends of America’s past will be remembered. The National Garden will be built to reflect the awesome splendor of our country’s timeless exceptionalism. It will be a place where citizens, young and old, can renew their vision of greatness and take up the challenge that I gave every American in my first address to Congress, to ‘‘[b]elieve in yourselves, believe in your future, and believe, once more, in America.’’ Across this Nation, belief in the greatness and goodness of America has come under attack in recent months and years by a dangerous anti-American extremism that seeks to dismantle our country’s history, institutions, and very identity.
    [Show full text]
  • Jewish Scientists, Jewish Ethics and the Making of the Atomic Bomb
    8 Jewish Scientists, Jewish Ethics and the Making of the Atomic Bomb MERON MEDZINI n his book The Jews and the Japanese: The Successful Outsiders, Ben-Ami IShillony devoted a chapter to the Jewish scientists who played a central role in the development of nuclear physics and later in the construction and testing of the fi rst atomic bomb. He correctly traced the well-known facts that among the leading nuclear physics scientists, there was an inordinately large number of Jews (Shillony 1992: 190–3). Many of them were German, Hungarian, Polish, Austrian and even Italian Jews. Due to the rise of virulent anti-Semitism in Germany, especially after the Nazi takeover of that country in 1933, most of the German-Jewish scientists found themselves unemployed, with no laboratory facilities or even citi- zenship, and had to seek refuge in other European countries. Eventually, many of them settled in the United States. A similar fate awaited Jewish scientists in other central European countries that came under German occupation, such as Austria, or German infl uence as in the case of Hungary. Within a short time, many of these scientists who found refuge in America were highly instrumental in the exceedingly elabo- rate and complex research and work that eventually culminated in the construction of the atomic bomb at various research centres and, since 1943, at the Los Alamos site. In this facility there were a large number of Jews occupying the highest positions. Of the heads of sections in charge of the Manhattan Project, at least eight were Jewish, led by the man in charge of the operation, J.
    [Show full text]
  • EUGENE PAUL WIGNER November 17, 1902–January 1, 1995
    NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES E U G ENE PAUL WI G NER 1902—1995 A Biographical Memoir by FR E D E R I C K S E I T Z , E RICH V OG T , A N D AL V I N M. W E I NBER G Any opinions expressed in this memoir are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Academy of Sciences. Biographical Memoir COPYRIGHT 1998 NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS WASHINGTON D.C. Courtesy of Atoms for Peace Awards, Inc. EUGENE PAUL WIGNER November 17, 1902–January 1, 1995 BY FREDERICK SEITZ, ERICH VOGT, AND ALVIN M. WEINBERG UGENE WIGNER WAS A towering leader of modern physics Efor more than half of the twentieth century. While his greatest renown was associated with the introduction of sym- metry theory to quantum physics and chemistry, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in physics for 1963, his scientific work encompassed an astonishing breadth of sci- ence, perhaps unparalleled during his time. In preparing this memoir, we have the impression we are attempting to record the monumental achievements of half a dozen scientists. There is the Wigner who demonstrated that symmetry principles are of great importance in quan- tum mechanics; who pioneered the application of quantum mechanics in the fields of chemical kinetics and the theory of solids; who was the first nuclear engineer; who formu- lated many of the most basic ideas in nuclear physics and nuclear chemistry; who was the prophet of quantum chaos; who served as a mathematician and philosopher of science; and the Wigner who was the supervisor and mentor of more than forty Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Cognitive Triad. Semantic Geometry of Context Representation
    Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 24 February 2020 doi:10.20944/preprints202002.0338.v1 Quantum Cognitive Triad. Semantic geometry of context representation Ilya A. Surov February 22, 2020 Abstract The paper describes an algorithm for cognitive representation of triples of related behavioral contexts two of which correspond to mu- tually exclusive states of some binary situational factor while uncer- tainty of this factor is the third context. The contexts are mapped to vector states in the two-dimensional quantum Hilbert space describ- ing a dichotomic decision alternative in relation to which the contexts are subjectively recognized. The obtained triad of quantum cogni- tive representations functions as a minimal carrier of semantic rela- tions between the contexts, which are quantified by phase relations between the corresponding quantum representation states. The de- scribed quantum model of subjective semantics supports interpretable vector calculus which is geometrically visualized in the Bloch sphere view of quantum cognitive states. 1 Introduction 1.1 Progress of psychology Since antiquity, psychology made a progress in understanding of human na- ture, including basic motivations of behavioral and cognitive activity [Freud, 1923, Adler, 1923], traits of perception and thinking [James, 1890, Kahneman, 2011], classification of personalities [Jung, 1921, Bukalov et al., 1999] and system- atization of unconscious cognition [Lacan, 1998, Hopwood, 2014]. Although useful in many ways, the kind of descriptions used in the these works has a problem which casts doubts on scientific status of the psychology field as a whole: linguistic categories it is based upon have no quantitative ex- pression and as such are subject to voluntary interpretation [Ferguson, 2012, 1 © 2020 by the author(s).
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum-Like Modeling of Cognition
    REVIEW published: 22 September 2015 doi: 10.3389/fphy.2015.00077 Quantum-like modeling of cognition Andrei Khrennikov * Department of Mathematics, Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden This paper begins with a historical review of the mutual influence of physics and psychology, from Freud’s invention of psychic energy inspired by von Boltzmann’ thermodynamics to the enrichment quantum physics gained from the side of psychology by the notion of complementarity (the invention of Niels Bohr who was inspired by William James), besides we consider the resonance of the correspondence between Wolfgang Pauli and Carl Jung in both physics and psychology. Then we turn to the problem of development of mathematical models for laws of thought starting with Boolean logic and progressing toward foundations of classical probability theory. Interestingly, the laws of classical logic and probability are routinely violated not only by quantum statistical phenomena but by cognitive phenomena as well. This is yet another common feature between quantum physics and psychology. In particular, cognitive data can exhibit a kind of the probabilistic interference effect. This similarity with quantum physics convinced a multi-disciplinary group of scientists (physicists, psychologists, economists, sociologists) Edited by: to apply the mathematical apparatus of quantum mechanics to modeling of cognition. Wei-Xing Zhou, East China University of Science and We illustrate this activity by considering a few concrete phenomena: the order and Technology, China disjunction effects, recognition of ambiguous figures, categorization-decision making. Reviewed by: In Appendix 1 of Supplementary Material we briefly present essentials of theory of Zhi-Qiang Jiang, contextual probability and a method of representations of contextual probabilities by East China University of Science and Technology, China complex probability amplitudes (solution of the “inverse Born’s problem”) based on a Qing Yun Wang, quantum-like representation algorithm (QLRA).
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Consciousness Theory Offers Not Just a Solution T
    Author’s version, published in R. Gennaro ed. The Routledge Handbook of Consciousness. London: Routledge, 2018. Chapter 16 Quantum Theories of Consciousness Paavo Pylkkänen “…quantum consciousness theory offers not just a solution to the mind-body problem, or additionally, to the nature of life and of time… And it does not just solve the Agent-Structure and Explanation-Understanding problems, or explain quantum decision theory's success in predicting otherwise anomalous behavior. What the theory offers is all of these things and more, and with them a unification of physical and social ontology that gives the human experience a home in the universe. With its elegance … comes not just extraordinary explanatory power, but extraordinary meaning, which at least this situated observer finds utterly lacking in the classical worldview. … I hope I have given you reason to suspend your belief that we really are just classical machines, and thus to suspend your disbelief in quantum consciousness long enough to try assuming it in your work. If you do, perhaps you will find your own home in the universe too” (Alexander Wendt, Quantum Mind and Social Science, 2015: 293). 1. Introduction Much of contemporary philosophy of mind and cognitive neuroscience presupposes that the physical framework to use when explaining mind and consciousness is the framework of classical physics (and neurophysiological and/or computational processes embedded in this framework); it is typically assumed that no ideas from quantum theory or relativity theory are needed. Of course, not all theories of 1 consciousness are trying to reduce conscious experience to mechanistic physical interactions at the neural level, but this tacit commitment to the classical physics of Newton and Maxwell introduces a strong mechanistic element into contemporary theorizing about consciousness, at least whenever the theories make a reference to physical processes.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum-Like Bayesian Inference Technologies for Cognition and Decision
    QuLBIT: Quantum-Like Bayesian Inference Technologies for Cognition and Decision Catarina Moreira1 ([email protected]) Matheus Hammes1 ([email protected]) Rasim Serdar Kurdoglu2 ([email protected]) Peter Bruza1 ([email protected]) 1School of Information Systems, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia 2Faculty of Business Administration, Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey Abstract what would be considered normatively correct ac- cording to logic or probability theory. This paper provides the foundations of a uni- fied cognitive decision-making framework (QulBIT) The field of Quantum Cognition emerged to re- which is derived from quantum theory. The main spond to this challenge, a major feature being the advantage of this framework is that it can cater use of quantum probability theory to model hu- for paradoxical and irrational human decision mak- ing. Although quantum approaches for cognition man cognition, including decision making (Buse- have demonstrated advantages over classical prob- meyer & Bruza, 2012). Quantum probability can abilistic approaches and bounded rationality mod- be viewed as generalisation of Bayesian probability els, they still lack explanatory power. To address this, we introduce a novel explanatory analysis of theory. In quantum-like cognitive models, events the decision-maker’s belief space. This is achieved are modelled as sub-spaces of a Hilbert spaces, by exploiting quantum interference effects as a way a vector space of complex numbers (amplitudes) of both quantifying and explaining the decision- maker’s uncertainty. We detail the main modules which enables the calculation of probabilities by of the unified framework, the explanatory analy- projection: performing the squared magnitude of sis method, and illustrate their application in situ- an amplitude.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Conceptuality Interpretation of Quantum and Relativity Theories
    On the Conceptuality Interpretation of Quantum and Relativity Theories Diederik Aerts1, Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi1;2, Sandro Sozzo3 and Tomas Veloz1;4 1 Center Leo Apostel for Interdisciplinary Studies, Brussels Free University Krijgskundestraat 33, 1160 Brussels, Belgium E-Mails: [email protected],[email protected] 2 Laboratorio di Autoricerca di Base, Lugano, Switzerland 3 School of Management and IQSCS, University of Leicester University Road, LE1 7RH Leicester, United Kingdom E-Mail: [email protected] 4 Instituto de Filosof´ıay Ciencias de la Complejidad IFICC, Los Alerces 3024, Nu~noa,~ Santiago, Chile E-Mail: [email protected] Abstract How can we explain the strange behavior of quantum and relativistic entities? Why do they behave in ways that defy our intuition about how physical entities should behave, considering our ordinary experience of the world around us? In this article, we address these questions by showing that the comportment of quantum and relativistic entities is not that strange after all, if we only consider what their nature might possibly be: not an objectual one, but a conceptual one. This not in the sense that quantum and relativistic entities would be human concepts, but in the sense that they would share with the latter a same conceptual nature, similarly to how electromagnetic and sound waves, although very different entities, can share a same undulatory nature. When this hypothesis is adopted, i.e., when a conceptuality interpretation about the deep nature of physical entities is taken seriously, many of the interpretational difficulties disappear and our physical world is back making sense, though our view of it becomes radically different from what our classical prejudice made us believe in the first place.
    [Show full text]
  • Physics of the Twentieth Century
    Keep Your Card in This Pocket Books will be issued only on presentation of proper library cards. Unless labeled otherwise, books may be retained for two weeks. Borrowers finding books marked, de faced or mutilated are expected to report same at library desk; otherwise the last borrower will be held responsible for all imperfections discovered. The card holder is responsible for all books drawn on this card. Penalty for over-due books 2c a day plus cost of notices. Lost cards and change of residence must be re ported promptly. Public Library Kansas City, Mo., TENSION gNVCtOPI CORP. KANSAS CITY. MO PUBUf 1 HfUM> DOD1 /'A- PHYSICS OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY PHYSICS of the 20 TH CENTURY By PASCUAL JORDAN Translated by ELEANOR OSHRT PHILOSOPHICAL LIBRARY NEW YOBK Copyright 1944 By Philosophical Library, lac, 15 East 40th Street, New York, N. Y. Printed in the United States of America by R Hubner & Co., Inc. New York, N. Y. CONTENTS ;?>; PAGE Preface ............................. ...... vii Chapter I Classical Mechanics ...................... 1 Chapter II Modern Electrodynamics . ............... 24 Chapter III The Reality of Atoms .................... 51 Chapter IV The Paradoxes of Quantum Phenomena .... 83 Chapter V The Quantum Theory Description of Nature. Ill Chapter VI Physics and World Observation .......... 139 Appendix I Cosmic Radiation .......... , ............ 166 Appendix II The Age of the World ............ .' ...... 173 PREFACE This book tries to present the concepts of modern physics in a systematic, complete review. The reader will be burdened as little with details of experimental techniques as with mathematical formulations of theory. Without becoming too deeply absorbed in the many, noteworthy details, we shall direct our attention toward the decisive facts and views, toward the guiding viewpoints of research and toward the enlistment of the spirit, which gives modern physics its particular phil osophical character, and which made the achieve ment of its revolutionary perception possible.
    [Show full text]