INDEX

Topics are arranged alphabetically in the INDEX.
Showing posts with label determinism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label determinism. Show all posts

Thursday, April 17, 2014

Einstein-Bohr Debate


Alice C. Linsley

It is said that in the field of Physics two great minds represented the age-old determinism- indeterminism tension or paradox. They are Albert Einstein and Neils Bohr.

Einstein preferred the determinism of classical physics over the quantum physics of Bohr and Heisenberg in which Complementarity and Uncertainty dictate that all properties and actions in the physical world are to some degree non-deterministic. Einstein and Bohr had good-natured arguments over such issues throughout their lives.


Heisenberg and Bohr

Bohr was convinced that light behaved like both waves and particles, and in 1927, experiments confirmed the de Broglie hypothesis that matter like electrons also behaved like waves. Bohr conceived the principle of complementarity: that items could be separately analysed as having several contradictory properties, such as a wave or a stream of particles depending on the experimental framework – two apparently mutually exclusive properties – on the basis of this principle. Bohr summarized the principle as follows:

[H]owever far the [quantum physical] phenomena transcend the scope of classical physical explanation, the account of all evidence must be expressed in classical terms. The argument is simply that by the word "experiment" we refer to a situation where we can tell others what we have done and what we have learned and that, therefore, the account of the experimental arrangements and of the results of the observations must be expressed in unambiguous language with suitable application of the terminology of classical physics.

This crucial point...implies the impossibility of any sharp separation between the behaviour of atomic objects and the interaction with the measuring instruments which serve to define the conditions under which the phenomena appear.... Consequently, evidence obtained under different experimental conditions cannot be comprehended within a single picture, but must be regarded as complementary in the sense that only the totality of the phenomenena exhausts the possible information about the objects
.[1]

For example, the particle and wave aspects of physical objects are such complementary phenomena. Both concepts are borrowed from classical mechanics, and measurements (e.g., the double-slit experiment) can demonstrate one or the other, but not both, phenomena at a particular moment. The principle of complementarity explains this as being due to the very nature of the measuring devices used. A measuring device may be designed to demonstrate either the particle or wave aspects, but the demonstration of one necessarily precludes the possibility of simultaneously demonstrating the other, because the object being measured is unavoidably affected by the measurement. It is impossible to design a measuring device that demonstrates both phenomena simultaneously not because of lack of creativity on the part of the experimenter, but simply because such a device is literally inconceivable. Moreover, Bohr implies that it is not possible to regard objects governed by quantum mechanics as having intrinsic properties independent of determination with a measuring device.

In Copenhagen in 1927 Heisenberg developed his uncertainty principle. The ultimate limitations in precision of property manifestations are quantified by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and Planck units. Complementarity and Uncertainty dictate that all properties and actions in the physical world are therefore non-deterministic to some degree.

At a conference Como in September 1927 Bohr gave a presentation in which he demonstrated that the uncertainty principle could be derived from classical arguments, and without quantum terminology or matrices. Shortly before his death Bohr complained that no professional philosopher had grasped his understanding of complementarity.


Related reading:  Chance, Fortune, Determinism and Indeterminism

Saturday, January 25, 2014

Chance, Fortune, Determinism and Indeterminism


Alice C. Linsley

My students have many questions about divine intervention, luck, randomness, etc. Luck is random. There is no pattern with luck. Divine intervention is detected by observing patterns in nature and in human experience over long periods of time (collective memory). Faith is built by those who observe and reflect on what they observe. This is true for religious people and for non-religious people.

Today, as in the ancient world, one hears conversations about individual choice, determinism, randomness, free will, predestination, destiny, fortune, and chance. We have had such discussions in class. To gain some definition, let us consider the meanings of the words chance, fortune, determinism and indeterminism. This will be helpful preparation for the lesson in which we explore the different worldviews of the physicists Albert Einstein and Neils Bohr.

Chance
The word chance expresses the idea of swerving, bending or falling away from a determined path. The swerve does not mean that the path will never be regained in the individual's life.

The concept of chance is related to the word “declension” from the Latin verb declino, declinare, declinavi, declinatum, meaning “to turn aside”, in the sense of varying the form of a noun, pronoun or adjective according to its grammatical function. This usage is much like that of inflectere “to bend” which refers to morphological changes. The word inflection, or casus, indicates a “falling” from the basic nominative case.

Chance implies a pattern of decline or inflection or an action that appears to spin off a projected path. Chance permits the possibility of a singularity or a rare anomaly. Soren Kierkegaard believed in chance in as much as he believed that the operation of the supernatural in the natural world may lead to side paths in the individual's life. This is how he understood Abraham's offering of Isaac. Such radical action is sometimes necessary to reach one's existential destiny, but does not represent a total departure from the original path of one's life.


Fortune
The word fortune expresses the idea of making strong or fortifying. One's fortune is not left to chance, but forged by character and effort. When someone says, "May you have good fortune," they wish for you positive returns for your hard work.

Machiavelli did not believe in chance. He believed in fortune. He wrote in chapter 1 of The Prince that new principalities are won by "the arms of others or with his own, either by fortune or prowess." In other words a person can come into power by fortune or by his own strengthening of his position.


Determinism
In determinism all events, including human action, are ultimately determined by causes external to the will. Some philosophers take determinism to imply that individual humans have no free will and therefore cannot be held morally responsible for their actions.

For some, determinism is the mechanistic and impersonal rule of causation from antecedents. This view is typically held by atheists and radical materialists.

Others may see God or some metaphysical explanation for Cause. An extreme view is found in a non-biblical teaching that God has predestined all humans to either heaven or hell.

Albert Einstein held a view that physics is fundamentally determined by laws that can be discovered and explained mathematically. Einstein preferred the determinism of classical physics over the quantum physics of Bohr and Heisenberg in which Complementarity and Uncertainty dictate that all properties and actions in the physical world are to some degree non-deterministic. Einstein and Bohr had good-natured arguments over such issues throughout their lives.


Bohr and Einstein at Paul Ehrenfest's home in Leiden 
(December 1925)

Indeterminism
Indeterminism holds that not all events are wholly determined by antecedent causes.  When it comes to human actions, the will is free to make deliberate choices not determined by or predictable from antecedent causes.

Numerous physicists have asserted that a strict determinist view cannot do justice to nature. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and Planck units suggest ultimate uncertainty. Complementarity and uncertainty dictate that all properties and actions in the physical world are therefore non-deterministic to some degree.

Now we must consider the principle that observes that randomness resolves itself in patterns. This can be observed in physics experiments and in studies of human thought that show that the human brain will construct meaning where something appears to be meaningless. This is why statistical randomness does not prove the actual existence of true randomness.


Related reading:  Machiavelli Believed in Fortune; Schrödinger's 1931 paper on Indeterminism in Physics, presented to the Congress of a Society for Philosophical Instruction; Time and Eternity