DOCSLIB.ORG

Copyright © 2005 Jeremy Royal Howard All Rights Reserved. The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Copyright © 2005 Jeremy Royal Howard All rights reserved. The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary has permission to reproduce and disseminate this document in any form by any means for purposes chosen by the Seminary, including, without limitation, preservation and instruction. THE COPENHAGEN INTERPRETATION OF QUANTUM PHYSICS: AN ASSESSMENT OF ITS FITNESS FOR USE IN CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY AND APOLOGETICS A Dissertation Presented to the faculty of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy by Jeremy Royal Howard December 2005 UMI Number: 3194782 Copyright 2005 by Howard, Jeremy Royal All rights reserved. INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. ® UMI UMI Microform 3194782 Copyright 2006 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, M148106-1346 APPROVAL SHEET THE COPENHAGEN INTERPRETATION OF QUANTUM PHYSICS: AN ASSESSMENT OF ITS FITNESS FOR USE IN CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY AND APOLOGETICS Jeremy Royal Howard Read and Approved by: ellum L---.----­ ~Bru~~A.W~are ~~a~,__V._.~~~\ THESES Ph.D .. H834c o19970 1~4~669 . To Simone, a gift from heaven, by way of Brazil TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PREFACE . VIlI Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION 1 The Two-Slit Experiment and the Measurement Problem. 4 Quantum Probabilities ....................................... 7 Non-Locality .............................................. 8 The Current State of Quantum Physics .......................... 8 Quantum Mechanical Fruitfulness and Mystery . 9 Formalism and Interpretation in Quantum Theory ............. 10 Introduction to the Copenhagen Interpretation. 12 Introduction to Thesis . 13 Outline of Approach . 15 2. THE COPENHAGEN INTERPRETATION OF QUANTUM PHYSICS ..................................... 19 Core Components of the Copenhagen Interpretation . 20 Quantum Indeterminism. 21 Complementarity . 23 The Measurement Problem ............................... 29 Erwin Schrodinger's Cat. 33 The EPR Experiment. 34 Bell, EPR, and Non-Locality. 40 Classical Language and Completeness 42 IV Chapter Page Irrationality . 46 Conclusion ................................................ 47 3. APPLICATIONS OF THE COPENHAGEN INTERPRETATION IN SOCIOLOGY, PHILOSOPHY, AND SCIENCE. 50 Applications in Sociology .................................... 51 Business and Leadership ................................. 51 Feminism and Race. 54 Applications in Philosophy. 57 Philosophy of Science ................................... 57 Quantum Logic ........................................ 64 Assessing the Case for Quantum Logic. 67 Truth and Reason . 69 Epistemology and Postmodernism . 72 Applications in Science ...................................... 75 Human Consciousness . 75 Assessment of Quantum-Mechanical Consciousness . 77 Scientific Cosmology. 78 Chapter Summary. .. 87 4. APPLICATIONS OF THE COPENHAGEN INTERPRET A TION IN METAPHYSICS AND THEOLOGY. 91 Holism and Panpsychism . 91 Assessing the Case for Holism and Panpsychism . 97 Quantum Physics and Purported Eastern Parallels. 98 Buddhism and Quantum Mechanics ........................ 99 The East and Quantum Physics: An Assessment. 102 Quantum Ontology. 103 Quantum Physics and Theology. 105 v Chapter Page Quantum Physics and Free Will . 105 Assessing the Case for Quantum-Based Free Will . 109 Quantum Physics and Special Divine Agency. 110 Assessing the Case for Quantum-Based SDA . 116 Miscellaneous Theological Issues . 118 Chapter Summary . .. ....................... 120 5. CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE COPENHAGEN INTERPRETATION.......................................... 122 The Copenhagen Cohort. 122 Niels Bohr ............................................ 123 Bohr the Communicator ............................. 123 Bohr's Philosophy. 128 Summary on Bohr . 136 Wolfgang Pauli and Werner Heisenberg . 136 Summary on Pauli and Heisenberg . 140 David Bohm's Alternative Interpretation. 141 Bohm Rejected. 147 De Broglie's Pilot Wave ..................................... 150 The Forman Hypothesis. 153 Assessing the Forman Hypothesis. 156 Public Relations, America, and Historical Contingency ............. 158 Von Neumann's Proof. 160 Scientific Critique of the Orthodox Interpretation. 162 Problems of Demarcation and Interpretation. 163 Violation of the Correspondence Principle ................... 164 The Completeness Claim . 166 VI Chapter Page Hidden Variables and Indeterminism ....................... 167 Quantum Non-Locality ................................. 171 In Defense of Realism . 173 Christian Worldview Critique of the Copenhagen View. 175 Chapter Summary. 180 6. CONCLUSION............................................... 182 BIBLIOGRAPHY . 188 Vll PREFACE From start to finish, my time in the doctoral studies program here at Southern has been made possible by a team of generous supporters. I think of my wife, Simone, as the captain of this team. Over the course of three years she prepared and packed a count­ less number of lunches and dinners to keep me going, washed the many mounds of clothes I dirtied at UPS, abided my exhausted silence as I dragged in late at night, and prayed constantly as I faced the many deadlines that link together the plots and subplots of the graduate school drama. All this, plus she lovingly cared for our magnificent chil­ dren, Isaac Vaughn and Josie Marie. Eu amo minha querida Simone, efm;o votos de amala para sempre. My parents provided vital financial support whenever it was needed. Thank you, Royal Howard, for giving so freely and gladly. Thank you, Donna and Bill Curran, for doing the same. And thanks to all three of you for straight fences, painted doors, and crown molding. Fellowship Bible Church in Little Rock, Arkansas, also supported us very gen­ erously throughout my studies. In fact, the saints at FBC underwrote the entire last year of my studies. In particular, I want to thank Dr. Robert Lewis for believing in me and enlisting my efforts for the great work that is to be attempted in God's name by FBC and GlobalReach in the years to come. Dr. Jim Parker has been my advisor from day one in the doctoral studies pro­ gram. His unfailing advice has always been: get it done. On more than a few occasions I suggested to him that I might take a little diversion from the fast track, but he gently re- Vlll minded me that I could do those "other things" after the Ph.D. was in hand. Dr. Parker, your words never seemed wiser to me than they do right now. Thanks! Dr. Ronald H. Nash, whom I served for two years as graduate assistant, has been a true friend and mentor to me. Ron retired just before I got to the finish line with this dissertation. Sir, it has been an honor and a pleasure. I can only pray that God will use me a fraction as much as he uses you. Your scholarship has made a difference. Dr. Stephen J. Wellum has been a real asset to me throughout my theological studies. His command of issues at the interface of theology and apologetics has helped me understand the unity of the theological and apologetic tasks, and his personal com­ mitment to Christ has called me upward many times. Dr. Bruce A. Ware was my first hero in theology. His passionate dedication to the Word of God in an age of compromise inspires me to fight the good fight no matter the cost, and his willingness to jump aboard my dissertation committee in the midnight hour is a sacrifice I will never forget. Marsha Omanson has saved many doctoral students from the ignominy of submitting substandard manuscripts. I am the chief of these students. Thanks, Marsha! Finally, thanks be to God for all of the above blessings, for each of them ulti­ mately comes from His hand. I pray that God is pleased with what I have attempted to do in this dissertation. Jeremy Royal Howard Louisville, Kentucky June 2005 IX CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION I argue in this dissertation that the Copenhagen interpretation (CI)! of quantum physics, an interpretation that posits a basic irrationality in the quantum realm, is not suit- able for use in Christian theological formulation or apologetic engagement. Quantum mechanics is the branch of physics that studies the nature and behavior of atomic and subatomic entities. From the time of Newton's ascendancy to the dawn of the twentieth century, it was assumed that the steady march of scientific advancement would someday bring Newtonian descriptions to bear on nature's smallest components. On this assump- tion, tracing the activities of a quantum particle such as an electron should be as simple as obtaining values for variables such as position, momentum, and trajectory, and then pro- jecting outcomes based on methods common to Newton's mechanics. Underlying this methodology are presuppositions that the world is by nature rational in structure and op- eration and that the scientific investigator is a mere observer rather than a participant in the experimental results he obtains via his tests. Confidence in
Recommended publications

  • Divine Action and the World of Science: What Cosmology and Quantum Physics Teach Us About the Role of Providence in Nature 247 Bruce L

    Journal of Biblical and Theological Studies JBTSVOLUME 2 | ISSUE 2 Christianity and the Philosophy of Science Divine Action and the World of Science: What Cosmology and Quantum Physics Teach Us about the Role of Providence in Nature 247 Bruce L. Gordon [JBTS 2.2 (2017): 247-298] Divine Action and the World of Science: What Cosmology and Quantum Physics Teach Us about the Role of Providence in Nature1 BRUCE L. GORDON Bruce L. Gordon is Associate Professor of the History and Philosophy of Science at Houston Baptist University and a Senior Fellow of Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture Abstract: Modern science has revealed a world far more exotic and wonder- provoking than our wildest imaginings could have anticipated. It is the purpose of this essay to introduce the reader to the empirical discoveries and scientific concepts that limn our understanding of how reality is structured and interconnected—from the incomprehensibly large to the inconceivably small—and to draw out the metaphysical implications of this picture. What is unveiled is a universe in which Mind plays an indispensable role: from the uncanny life-giving precision inscribed in its initial conditions, mathematical regularities, and natural constants in the distant past, to its material insubstantiality and absolute dependence on transcendent causation for causal closure and phenomenological coherence in the present, the reality we inhabit is one in which divine action is before all things, in all things, and constitutes the very basis on which all things hold together (Colossians 1:17). §1. Introduction: The Intelligible Cosmos For science to be possible there has to be order present in nature and it has to be discoverable by the human mind.
  • Secrets Jeremy Bernstein

    Secrets Jeremy Bernstein

    INFERENCE / Vol. 6, No. 1 Secrets Jeremy Bernstein Restricted Data: The History of Nuclear Secrecy in the decided to found a rival weapons laboratory. Even if Teller United States had offered me a job, I doubt that I would have accepted.3 by Alex Wellerstein After obtaining my degree, I was offered a job that University of Chicago Press, 528 pp., $35.00. would keep me in Cambridge for at least another year. One year became two and at the end of my second year I was uclear weapons have been shrouded in secrecy accepted at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. from the very beginning. After plutonium was It was around this time that the chairman of the physics discovered at the University of California in department at Harvard, Kenneth Bainbridge, came to me NDecember 1940, researchers led by Glenn Seaborg submit- with an offer. Bainbridge had been an important figure at ted a pair of letters to the Physical Review. The details of Los Alamos during the war. Robert Oppenheimer had put their discovery were withheld from publication until after him in charge of the site in New Mexico where the Trinity the war.1 Once the project to make a nuclear weapon got test had taken place.4 Bainbridge told me that the labora- underway, secrecy became a very serious matter indeed. tory was offering summer jobs to young PhDs and asked The story of these efforts and how they evolved after the if I was interested. I was very interested. Los Alamos had war is the subject of Alex Wellerstein’s Restricted Data: an almost mystical significance for me due to its history The History of Nuclear Secrecy in the United States.
  • Philosophical Rhetoric in Early Quantum Mechanics, 1925-1927

    Philosophical Rhetoric in Early Quantum Mechanics, 1925-1927

    b1043_Chapter-2.4.qxd 1/27/2011 7:30 PM Page 319 b1043 Quantum Mechanics and Weimar Culture FA 319 Philosophical Rhetoric in Early Quantum Mechanics 1925–27: High Principles, Cultural Values and Professional Anxieties Alexei Kojevnikov* ‘I look on most general reasoning in science as [an] opportunistic (success- or unsuccessful) relationship between conceptions more or less defined by other conception[s] and helping us to overlook [danicism for “survey”] things.’ Niels Bohr (1919)1 This paper considers the role played by philosophical conceptions in the process of the development of quantum mechanics, 1925–1927, and analyses stances taken by key participants on four main issues of the controversy (Anschaulichkeit, quantum discontinuity, the wave-particle dilemma and causality). Social and cultural values and anxieties at the time of general crisis, as identified by Paul Forman, strongly affected the language of the debate. At the same time, individual philosophical positions presented as strongly-held principles were in fact flexible and sometimes reversible to almost their opposites. One can understand the dynamics of rhetorical shifts and changing strategies, if one considers interpretational debates as a way * Department of History, University of British Columbia, 1873 East Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T 1Z1; [email protected]. The following abbreviations are used: AHQP, Archive for History of Quantum Physics, NBA, Copenhagen; AP, Annalen der Physik; HSPS, Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences; NBA, Niels Bohr Archive, Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen; NW, Die Naturwissenschaften; PWB, Wolfgang Pauli, Wissenschaftlicher Briefwechsel mit Bohr, Einstein, Heisenberg a.o., Band I: 1919–1929, ed. A. Hermann, K.V.
  • Department of Physics and Astronomy 6127 Wilder Laboratory, Dartmouth College Hanover, NH 03755 Email: Marcelo.Gleiser@Dartmouth.Edu

    Department of Physics and Astronomy 6127 Wilder Laboratory, Dartmouth College Hanover, NH 03755 Email: [email protected]

    CURRICULUM VITAE Name: Marcelo Gleiser Address: Department of Physics and Astronomy 6127 Wilder Laboratory, Dartmouth College Hanover, NH 03755 Email: [email protected] http://www.marcelogleiser.com Telephone: (+1-603) 646-1489/2359 (office) Social Media: Website: https://marcelogleiser.com Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Marcelo-Gleiser-181684578568436/ Twitter: https://twitter.com Instagram: gleiserofficial YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/MarceloGleiser Date of Birth: March 19th, 1959 Place of Birth: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (U.S. Citizen) Education: Ph.D.: Theoretical Physics from the University of London, King's College London, Jul. 1986. Thesis title: Kaluza-Klein Cosmology Ph.D. advisor: Prof. J.G. Taylor. M.Sc.: Physics from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Jul. 1982. Thesis title: Gauge Field Copies and the Higgs Mechanism. B.Sc.: Physics from the Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, Jul. 1981. Honors and Awards: • Doctor Honoris Causa { State University of Maranh~ao,Brazil (2020). • 2019 Templeton Prize laureate. • Doctor Honoris Causa { Pontifical Catholic University of Paran´a,Brazil (2019). • 2019 Education Leadership Award from Educando by Worldfund Foundation. • Honorary Fellow, International Society for Science and Religion. • Fellow of the American Physical Society. • 2018 Drawbridge Lecture in Science and Religion, Saint Paul's Cathedral, London. • Elected Professor Extraordinarius at the University of South Africa. • Winner of the 2017 \Jabuti Award", the highest literary award given in Brazil, for nonfiction book \The Simple Beauty of the Unexpected". • Winner of the 2002 \Jabuti Award", the highest literary award given in Brazil, for nonfiction book \The Prophet and the Astronomer". • Winner of the 1998 \Jabuti Award", the highest literary award given in Brazil, for nonfiction book \The Dancing Universe: From Creation Myths to the Big Bang".

  • 9780521884082Ind CUNY1152/Bernstein 978 0 521

    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-12637-3 - Nuclear Weapons: What You Need to Know Jeremy Bernstein P1:KNPIndex 9780521884082More informatioindn CUNY1152/Bernstein 978 0 521 88408 2 August 1, 2007 13:2 INDEX Abelson, Philip isotope separation work, 31–32 discovery of neptunium, 100–102 isotope stability detection work, 30–31 finding of first transuranic, 96 Atkinson, Robert, 203–204 Aberdeen Proving Ground (Maryland), 147 Atlantic magazine, 7 active material, of atom bomb, 249–251 atomic bomb Alamogordo bombing range (Jornada del effect on Hiroshima, 4–5 Muerto), 152 German program, 26, 49 allotropism, 108 Urchin type initiator, 248–249 alpha particles, 18, 19 work of Chadwick, 24–25 artificial isotopes of, 43 atomic model, of Thomson, 16, 23 decay of, 193, 198–203 atomic quantum theory formulation, 18, and decay of plutonium, 144 23, 50 description of, 193, 194–195, 198–203 atomic weight, 93 emission by polonium, 133 Gamow’s barrier penetration theory, 203 Bainbridge, Kenneth, 123 and induction of gamma radiation, 26 barium, 50 quantum point of view of, 195 as fission fragment, 71 ALSOS missions, 229, 231, 238, 251 and Hahn’s uranium experiments, 46 Anderson, Carl, 196 isotopes of, 72 Anderson, Herbert, 74 Strassmann’s discovery of, 72, 280 anti-particle. See positrons (anti-particle) Becker, Herbert, 25 Ardenne, Manfred von, 228 Bell, John, 80 invention of form of calutron, 202 Ben-Gurion, David, 275–277 paper on plutonium-239, 202 Bernstein, Jeremy shipped to Soviet Union by Russia, 202, employment at Brookhaven, 177 260 employment
  • Atheism Is Inconsistent with the Scientific Method, Prizewinning Physicist Says - Scientific American

    Atheism Is Inconsistent with the Scientific Method, Prizewinning Physicist Says - Scientific American

    8/4/2019 Atheism Is Inconsistent with the Scientific Method, Prizewinning Physicist Says - Scientific American Subscribe PHYSICS Atheism Is Inconsistent with the Scientific Method, Prizewinning Physicist Says In conversation, the 2019 Templeton Prize winner does not pull punches on the limits of science, the value of humility and the irrationality of nonbelief By Lee Billings on March 20, 2019 Theoretical physicist Marcelo Gleiser, recipient of the 2019 Templeton Prize. Credit: Eli Burakian Dartmouth College https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/atheism-is-inconsistent-with-the-scientific-method-prizewinning-physicist-says/ 1/10 8/4/2019 Atheism Is Inconsistent with the Scientific Method, Prizewinning Physicist Says - Scientific American ADVERTISEMENT Marcelo Gleiser, a 60-year-old Brazil-born theoretical physicist at Dartmouth College and prolific science popularizer, has won this year’s Templeton Prize. Valued at just under $1.5 million, the award from the John Templeton Foundation annually recognizes an individual “who has made an exceptional contribution to affirming life’s spiritual dimension.” Its past recipients include scientific luminaries such as Sir Martin Rees and Freeman Dyson, as well as religious or political leaders such as Mother Teresa, Desmond Tutu and the Dalai Lama. Across his 35-year scientific career, Gleiser’s research has covered a wide breadth of topics, ranging from the properties of the early universe to the behavior of fundamental particles and the origins of life. But in awarding him its most prestigious honor, the Templeton Foundation chiefly cited his status as a leading public intellectual revealing “the historical, philosophical and cultural links between science, the humanities and spirituality.” He is also the first Latin American to receive the prize.
  • UC San Diego UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations

    UC San Diego UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations

    UC San Diego UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title The new prophet : Harold C. Urey, scientist, atheist, and defender of religion Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3j80v92j Author Shindell, Matthew Benjamin Publication Date 2011 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO The New Prophet: Harold C. Urey, Scientist, Atheist, and Defender of Religion A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in History (Science Studies) by Matthew Benjamin Shindell Committee in charge: Professor Naomi Oreskes, Chair Professor Robert Edelman Professor Martha Lampland Professor Charles Thorpe Professor Robert Westman 2011 Copyright Matthew Benjamin Shindell, 2011 All rights reserved. The Dissertation of Matthew Benjamin Shindell is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Chair University of California, San Diego 2011 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page……………………………………………………………………...... iii Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………. iv Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………….
  • Quantum Theory Needs No 'Interpretation'

    Quantum Theory Needs No 'Interpretation'

    Quantum Theory Needs No ‘Interpretation’ But ‘Theoretical Formal-Conceptual Unity’ (Or: Escaping Adán Cabello’s “Map of Madness” With the Help of David Deutsch’s Explanations) Christian de Ronde∗ Philosophy Institute Dr. A. Korn, Buenos Aires University - CONICET Engineering Institute - National University Arturo Jauretche, Argentina Federal University of Santa Catarina, Brazil. Center Leo Apostel fot Interdisciplinary Studies, Brussels Free University, Belgium Abstract In the year 2000, in a paper titled Quantum Theory Needs No ‘Interpretation’, Chris Fuchs and Asher Peres presented a series of instrumentalist arguments against the role played by ‘interpretations’ in QM. Since then —quite regardless of the publication of this paper— the number of interpretations has experienced a continuous growth constituting what Adán Cabello has characterized as a “map of madness”. In this work, we discuss the reasons behind this dangerous fragmentation in understanding and provide new arguments against the need of interpretations in QM which —opposite to those of Fuchs and Peres— are derived from a representational realist understanding of theories —grounded in the writings of Einstein, Heisenberg and Pauli. Furthermore, we will argue that there are reasons to believe that the creation of ‘interpretations’ for the theory of quanta has functioned as a trap designed by anti-realists in order to imprison realists in a labyrinth with no exit. Taking as a standpoint the critical analysis by David Deutsch to the anti-realist understanding of physics, we attempt to address the references and roles played by ‘theory’ and ‘observation’. In this respect, we will argue that the key to escape the anti-realist trap of interpretation is to recognize that —as Einstein told Heisenberg almost one century ago— it is only the theory which can tell you what can be observed.
  • Marcel Grossmann Awards

    Marcel Grossmann Awards

    MG15 MARCEL GROSSMANN AWARDS ROME 2018 ICRANet and ICRA MG XV MARCEL GROSSMANN AWARDS ROME 2018 and TEST The 15th Marcel Grossmann Meeting – MG XV 2nd July 2018, Rome (Italy) Aula Magna – University “Sapienza” of Rome Institutional Awards Goes to: PLANCK SCIENTIFIC COLLABORATION (ESA) “for obtaining important constraints on the models of inflationary stage of the Universe and level of primordial non-Gaussianity; measuring with unprecedented sensitivity gravitational lensing of Cosmic Microwave Background fluctuations by large-scale structure of the Universe and corresponding B- polarization of CMB, the imprint on the CMB of hot gas in galaxy clusters; getting unique information about the time of reionization of our Universe and distribution and properties of the dust and magnetic fields in our Galaxy” - presented to Jean-Loup Puget, the Principal Investigator of the High Frequency Instrument (HFI) HANSEN EXPERIMENTAL PHYSICS LABORATORY AT STANFORD UNIVERSITY “to HEPL for having developed interdepartmental activities at Stanford University at the frontier of fundamental physics, astrophysics and technology” - presented to Research Professor Leo Hollberg, HEPL Assistant Director Individual Awards Goes to LYMAN PAGE “for his collaboration with David Wilkinson in realizing the NASA Explorer WMAP mission and as founding director of the Atacama Cosmology Telescope” Goes to RASHID ALIEVICH SUNYAEV “for the development of theoretical tools in the scrutinising, through the CMB, of the first observable electromagnetic appearance of our Universe” Goes to SHING-TUNG YAU “for the proof of the positivity of total mass in the theory of general relativity and perfecting as well the concept of quasi-local mass, for his proof of the Calabi conjecture, for his continuous inspiring role in the study of black holes physics” Each recipient is presented with a silver casting of the TEST sculpture by the artist A.
  • Black Holes and Qubits

    Black Holes and Qubits

    Subnuclear Physics: Past, Present and Future Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Scripta Varia 119, Vatican City 2014 www.pas.va/content/dam/accademia/pdf/sv119/sv119-duff.pdf Black Holes and Qubits MICHAEL J. D UFF Blackett Labo ratory, Imperial C ollege London Abstract Quantum entanglement lies at the heart of quantum information theory, with applications to quantum computing, teleportation, cryptography and communication. In the apparently separate world of quantum gravity, the Hawking effect of radiating black holes has also occupied centre stage. Despite their apparent differences, it turns out that there is a correspondence between the two. Introduction Whenever two very different areas of theoretical physics are found to share the same mathematics, it frequently leads to new insights on both sides. Here we describe how knowledge of string theory and M-theory leads to new discoveries about Quantum Information Theory (QIT) and vice-versa (Duff 2007; Kallosh and Linde 2006; Levay 2006). Bekenstein-Hawking entropy Every object, such as a star, has a critical size determined by its mass, which is called the Schwarzschild radius. A black hole is any object smaller than this. Once something falls inside the Schwarzschild radius, it can never escape. This boundary in spacetime is called the event horizon. So the classical picture of a black hole is that of a compact object whose gravitational field is so strong that nothing, not even light, can escape. Yet in 1974 Stephen Hawking showed that quantum black holes are not entirely black but may radiate energy, due to quantum mechanical effects in curved spacetime. In that case, they must possess the thermodynamic quantity called entropy.
  • Physics Newsletter 2019

    Physics Newsletter 2019

    Harvard University Department of Physics Newsletter FALL 2019 A Microscopic Look At Quantum Materials it takes many physicists to solve quantum many-body problems CONTENTS Letter from the Chair ............................................................................................................1 Letter from the Chair ON THE COVER: An experiment-theory collaboration PHYSICS DEPARTMENT HIGHLIGHTS at Harvard investigates possible Letters from our Readers.. ..................................................................................................2 Dear friends of Harvard Physics, While Prof. Prentiss has been in our department since 1991 (she was theories for how quantum spins (red the second female physicist to be awarded tenure at Harvard), our and blue spheres) in a periodic The sixth issue of our annual Faculty Promotion ............................................................................................................... 3 next article features a faculty member who joined our department potential landscape interact with one Physics Newsletter is here! In Memoriam ........................................................................................................................ 4 only two years ago, Professor Roxanne Guenette (pp. 22-26). another to give rise to intriguing and Please peruse it to find out about potentially useful emergent Current Progress in Mathematical Physics: the comings and goings in our On page 27, Clare Ploucha offers a brief introduction to the Harvard phenomena. This is an artist’s
  • Weimar, Cold War, and Historical Explanation: Re-Reading Forman

    Weimar, Cold War, and Historical Explanation: Re-Reading Forman

    JULIA HARRIET MENZEL AND DAVID KAISER* Weimar, Cold War, and Historical Explanation: Re-reading Forman ABSTRACT This essay is part of a special issue entitled “Looking Backward, Looking Forward: HSNS at 50,” edited by Erika Lorraine Milam. When historians of science try to make sense of the dramatic sweep of physics over the course of the twentieth century, two episodes often stand out: the intellectual ferment during the first quarter of the century, from which emerged both relativity and quantum theory; and the massive enrollment of physicists in military projects during and after the Second World War. Grappling with each of these transformations historically has elicited meth- odological challenges as much as empirical ones—challenges regarding agency, structure, and scale. Two of the most momentous interventions in this long-running scholarly discussion were written by Paul Forman and published in this journal: his early study of quantum physicists’ embrace of acausality during the years right after the First World War, and his later study of physicists and military patrons during the early Cold War. As we argue here, these articles point with fresh urgency to still-unresolved meth- odological challenges, well beyond the debates that had shaped their initial reception. *Program in Science, Technology, and Society, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA, [email protected], [email protected]. The following abbreviation is used: HSPS, Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences and Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences. Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences, Vol. 50, Number 1-2, pps. 31–40. ISSN 1939–1811, electronic ISSN 1939-182X.