quantum mechanics

David Bohm's ontological foundations of quantum mechanics have been of interest to philosophers of science in a conceptual position contrary to the common philosophical approach in quantum mechanics (Copenhagen interpretation). This research tries to provide a new perspective for understanding and completing the philosophical foundations of new sciences with a descriptive-analytical approach, taking into account the limitations of positivist explanations and relying on the foundations of Sadra's transcendental wisdom. In fact, the main issue is the question of how and to what extent transcendental wisdom plays a role in completing the ontological foundations of the Bohemian approach, and is it possible to open a new window for comparing Islamic philosophy and Western philosophy of science?The results of this research show that despite the different origins of the philosophical foundations of Bohm's and Mulla Sadra's views, ontological concepts such as; Bohm's inseparable and connected whole and the originality of Mullah Sadra's existence, Bohm's holographic world and hidden and hidden order with the degrees of suspicion of Sadra's existence, all of Bohm's movement and the essential movement of Mullah Sadra and the element of information and consciousness in Bohm's view with the aliveness of the universe from He adapted Mulla Sadra's view and determined the indicators of affinity and alignment

In the last century, some physicists challenged the principle of general causality in science, and claimed that in the subatomic world, some events happen that contradict determinism and causality. The positive interpretations of the thinkers of the Copenhagen school of the law of causality, especially in the interpretation of the path of particles, have formed a wrong argument and a pragmatic issue has been referred to an ontological issue, which brings physics into an abyss other than its specialized field. David Bohm, one of the greatest physicists of the 20th century, was able to present a causal formulation of quantum theory with his ontological interpretation and the use of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. From Mulla Sadra's point of view, the principle of causality is dominant in the world and no action will occur without a cause. Mulla Sadra's reliance on the primacy of being leads to the conclusion that if there is causality in the world of being, it is only in the context of being, and the criterion of the being's need for another lies only in thetruth of being as well as the poverty of being hidden in the essence of being. In his interpretation of quantum mechanics, Bohm has taken a general and philosophical view and by proposing hidden variables, he has taken an effective step closer to reality. What is necessary is to not return the hidden variables to a physical and material matter so that a comprehensive framework can be considered to solve the problems.

The concept of reality is one of the challenges we are concerned about nowadays in the philosophy of physics. In fact, this challenge has risen with the advent of quantum mechanics, a challenge that frustrated Einstein with quantum mechanics, of which he was a co-founder, and led him to consider it incomplete (EPR, 1935). According to Einstein, due to this "incompleteness", quantum mechanics -in addition to the standard variables- needs complementary variables that are hidden. These kinds of hidden variables theories are not discussed here. The purpose of this paper is to study the concept of reality in standard quantum mechanics that considers its dominant interpretation, i.e. the Copenhagen interpretation with the principal contribution of Bohr and Heisenberg. This interpretation is very close to logical positivism and the Vienna circle; but it is not. Therefore, in this article, we will examine the views of Bohr and Heisenberg and scientific positivism and their interpretation of "reality." There are elements of reality that are not affected by our knowledge, they have been criticized by empiricist and positivist philosophers, who believe that in any case "physical reality" cannot be more than what we know about it and we are talking about it. This interpretation of "reality" which is based on intersubjectivity, in the second half of the twentieth century, has been influential in other sciences from chemistry to literature and has become a paradigm, also it has affected the human mind. In modern social science "construction of social reality" can be made by something that everyone knows or a "collective intentionality". In reality, this criterion leads humans to the creation of "hyperreality" -a valid forgery or a copy without origin- instead of "reality". "hyperreality" is defined as the conscious inability to distinguish between "simulation" and "reality", especially in advanced postmodern industrial societies, where reality and imagination are entangled and indistinguishable (Baofu, 2009).

Method of Study: 

A comparative method has been used between physics and social science to show how the concepts and paradigms in physics could affect the human mind.

As a result of this research, base of some misconceptions in the modern era have been extracted and also shown their effects, for example, bliss is misunderstood, and a high rate of suicide in modern countries is a consequence of it.

Although quantum mechanics has had experimental successes, its interpretations have fundamental and unanswered problems, and these two (experimental successes of quantum mechanics and interpretations) are two completely independent and separate things that it is wrong to equate them. This mistake has led to the authenticity of anti-realist philosophies. Thus, "weak objectivity" has become the criterion of all reality. The requirement of weak objectivity is communicable", that is, the reality is intersubjective. Hence, in science, "communicability" is the measure of existing scientific reality. Regarding this definition of scientific reality, for example, the media can construct a "social reality" in what is made as "collective intentionality" which is not real, it is a "hyperreality".

Examining the views of Robert John Russell and William Pollard regarding theological arguments refutation of determinism based on the findings of quantum mechanics. The problem of determinism and free will in the framework of modern physics is discussed mostly based on the principles of quantum mechanics. In the meantime, William Pollard and Robert John Russell, who are both prominent physicists and at the same time Christian pastors, based on theological arguments, rejected determinism based on the findings of quantum mechanics, in which by accepting non-determinism as The inherent characteristic of atomic processes and the defense of the divine role and guardianship in the creation of this indeterminacy and its control have rejected the determinists' claim regarding the contradiction between the acceptance of free will for man and faith in the omnipotent and omnipotent God. In this article, after examining their views, we show that present approach is an effective step in presenting a satisfactory and comprehensive compatibilist view, especially in the framework of theological arguments. Of course, in order to solve the problems and shortcomings of this view, the problem of explaining and reductionism, assumed in this approach, should be criticized

As an ongoing concept in contemporary physics, determinism has embraced many changes during the history of physics; today it is one of the living issues of contemporary physics. Some scholars have deemed its removal as the main grounds for the development of classical physics into the modern one. There are several misunderstandings and scientific problems about this concept. Sound understanding and a precise philosophical analysis of the term can eliminate some of those problems particularly in physics. Accordingly, we follow up the literal and technical meanings and different kinds of determinism and then the course of its development both in science and Western philosophy. We thus come to know that determinism in classical physics and the “Laplacian definition” has assumed a perfect and global face; however, in quantum physics it proved to be a hard nut to crack. We have suggested a new framework for the concept of determinism thus providing a new approach to determinism out of its proposed conceptual implications. In the end, the authors try to clear up the incurred problem. They hold that they cannot get rid of the consequences of determinism thus it might not be eliminated from science, altogether. In the long run, Quantum mechanics goes to deny the perfect and global determinism, but might fall in some “imperfect local and statistical determinism”.

Broadly speaking, physicalism says the world consists of just the two types of entities: those posited by physics and those related, in some sense, to them. This relation is not symmetric in such a way that the former class has some sort of ontological priority to the latter. This article aims to show physicalism defined in terms of this relation, which I call the “fundamentality relation”, is not tenable if the picture of the world depicted by modern physics is taken seriously. Particularly, it will be argued that the dualities involved in quantum field theory imply the fundamentality relation to be a relative notion. Physicalism also becomes incoherent when the fundamentality relation is defined on symmetry structures of quantum theory. These among other arguments show that an alternative formulation of physicalism is needed to be articulated. Toward the end of the paper, I shall discuss some of these alternatives.

Heisenberg is one of the founders of quantum mechanics, and one of the pioneers and intellectual leaders of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. He proposed in two seminal papers in 1925 and 1927, the fundamentals of matrix mechanics (1925) as the first formalism of quantum mechanics, and then the uncertainty relations (1927) as one of the essential components of the Copenhagen interpretation. The purpose of this paper is to formulate Heisenberg's philosophical approaches during the formation of quantum mechanics and its Copenhagen interpretation. The main question of the paper is whether philosophical approaches can be formulated in the development of quantum mechanics through Heisenberg's works? To answer this question, two seminal papers by Heisenberg (1925 and 1927) are examined. The research method of the paper is based on the content analysis of the text (physics) of Heisenberg's papers. The findings of this study show that three crucial principles - observability, correspondence, and analogy-can be formulated from Heisenberg's 1925 paper, which has played a key role in the formation of the fundamentals of matrix mechanics. Moreover, from his 1927 paper, some issues are addressed including interpretation, understanding and classical-quantum relation, the role of experience and measurement, the subject of causality, as well as reality. Finally, it is concluded that through these works of Heisenberg, four philosophical approaches can be formulated including empiricism, Unificationism, indeterminism, and anti-causality, as well as anti-realism, which themselves include other sub-approaches.

When a natural disaster, such as corona, occurs, the question is often asked why God did not intervene to prevent it from happening. In this paper, we address this issue. In specific, the main issue we deal with in the present paper is whether a particular divine act can be carried out in the world. In other words, we raise the question of whether or not the presuppositions of the special divine act in the world and the presupposition of the laws of nature, some of which are causal, are contradictory. In fact, we consider the rationality of the possibility of special divine acts in the world, and we try to consider their implications for the laws of nature, especially the causal laws. In this regard, we make some remarks about causality. It is concluded that the special non-interventionist divine act can be exercised directly in the world, but it can occur in very, very rare cases.

From the time physicists have proposed the quantum logic, this logic is formed somehow in relation with quantum mechanics and experiences based on it. In fact, quantum mechanics and experiences gained from it assumed an approval to this logic. One of the highlights of the quantum mechanics, is uncertainty principle, which is a doctrine to reject the divisibility in quantum logic. Also EPR is assumed as a doctrine to reject the quantum mechanics. In the case of rejection of quantum mechanics, does the quantum logic also be questioned? In this paper it is shown that the uncertainty principle is rejecting the divisibility principle and EPR The aim of this study is to show that the uncertainty principal rejects divisibility principal, and hidden-variable theory which comes after EPR paradox, known as a rival theory, (even in the case of rejection of standard quantum mechanics) doesn’t reject the quantum logic. The outcome of this is that in practice quantum logic is independent of quantum mechanics, and it might be applied in areas other than quantum mechanics.

The main question in the subject of the divine action in nature is how God, as an immaterial being, relates to nature as a material being. In recent years, some have sought to address this issue by relying on the metaphysics and theology of Thomas Aquinas, and some by appealing to quantum indeterminism as the two mainstream views. A third group has addressed this issue based on emergentism theory. Emergentists have tried to solve the problem of divine action through a new theory of causality. They search for this theory of causality in the relationship between the natural objects that modern science deals with. The other characteristic of emergentism is the monistic approach, therein, while rejecting the substance dualism, does not fall into physicalism. In addition to explaining the emergentism approach, we argue in this paper that emergentism has more explanatory power than the two competing perspectives to solve the problem of divine action. The main argument in explaining its advantage over quantum's view is that emergentists do not provide a temporary answer due to its reliance on the metaphysics of science. In the face of the Thomistic view, the most crucial advantage of emergentism is a more precise interpretation of the laws of nature, which is rooted in the metaphysics of science. However, emergentism itself has been criticized, especially for the taking of panentheism theology.

Quantum Mechanics is the revolutionary theory that changes the structure of human thinking. From Einstein up to now , however , with its enormous successes in the world, there are many scientists that opposed it and denyed it as a complete theory . One of the ways to question the completeness of this theory is to use Gödel’s incompleteness theorems. Kurt Gödel, in his Ph. D. studied and just after working on the Hilbert’s completeness and consistency program in the formal systems, proved two important theorems which are known as the Gödel’s incompleteness theorems . These theorems deny Hilbert’s programs and the completeness of the formal system. Generalizing these theorems to the quantum theory is an over decades challenge in the foundations of physics. In this Paper , we explain the problem and we will discuss and critrize the possible usage of the Gödel’s incompleteness theorems on the quantum mechanics.

Contemporary physics believes that gravity and repulsion between sub-atoms cause vibrational motion and constant movement in objects, and considers this movement unstoppable even at the zero point of energy and a kind of necessity for the existence of the body. From this point of view, the cessation of intrinsic movement can be imagined only if the body disintegrates. On the basis of the originality of existence, Mulla Sadra extends motion in the existence of skeptical beings and considers substantial and intensified motion as inseparable components of moving beings. According to him, the movement and intensity of beings are permanent and will not stop even after death and resurrection. These two bases are comparable in several ways: Both bases have been proposed due to the inefficiency of previous systems. Both foundations consider the existence of motion as a prerequisite for the existence of beings capable of movement and movement. Contemporary physics, however, considers the intrinsic movement in the material world and current bodies, but in Sadra's final approach, motion and intensity, in addition to the material world, extend to all metaphysical beings except the necessary transcendence.

The aim of this paper is to provide a philosophical analysis of the problem of the wave function collapse by conscious observer, based on the theories of philosophy of mind. According to the approaches to the mind-body relation, the conceptual problems of this issue are examined both in the context of Cartesian Dualism, as well as emergent and epiphenomenal mental properties. It is concluded that by taking the physical and hardware approach to mind, raised the same conceptual difficulties of apparatuses in Quantum Mechanics, as well as mental and nonphysical approaches have the problem of explaining the mechanism of the interaction between the mind or mental properties and the observed physical system belongs to the external world. Also, by putting forward a thought experiment as well as by further discussions on the similarities between the "wave function collapse" and processes of "making decision" by a conscious observer, their conceptual consequences for quantum mechanics are examined. Finally, it is shown that each aspect of the problem has its own conceptual difficulties, and this issue will remain open under the mind-matter problem.

Quantum mechanics replaced the traditional mechanics in the early twentieth century. To study Schrodinger’s wave equation, whose position in this new mechanics is like the status of Newton’s movement laws in traditional mechanics, numerous philosophical statements have been offered, one of which is ‘quantum logic’. The founders of quantum logic claim that on the basis of their observations in quantum level, the traditional logic, which previously served as the measurement for right and wrong arguments, lacks the proper efficiency and must be replaced by one of the expressions of quantum logic. In the present article, while shortly introducing quantum mechanics and quantum logic, we have avoided entering the formal discussions of quantum logic and used analytical method to investigate the possibility of replacing the traditional logic with quantum logic. According to this study, it was clarified that one must regard quantum logic just as a mathematical formulization, not an alternative logic, because firstly it is dependent on a certain statement of Schrodinger’s equation, and secondly, one must use traditional logic to falsify it. Applying this logic to traditional and quantum logic would result in truth and falsehood of both logics and not falsehood of traditional logic and truth of alternative logic.

The "quantum" theory with Copenhagen's interpretation is a new twentieth century theory which studies subatomic objects. This interpretation of quantum mechanics has certain epistemological bases. Instrumentalism, in the three ontological, semantic and epistemological areas, is one of the main foundations of this interpretation. In the critique of this epistemological basis of the quantum theory, one can argue that the internal perspective from the position of an empirical scientist leads us to realism. But the external perspective of history and the course of the development of science shows that instrumentalism is a correct theory. It is worth noting that, using a descriptive- analytical method, this paper has challenged the instrumentalist perspective of the proponents of Copenhagen's interpretation and physicists such as Schrödinger and Einstein, and one can even witness realism in some of Heisenberg's interpretations.

The vision of most scientist and scholars in the first half of the twentieth century was empiricism. They gave more importance to observable experiences and phenomena, and the only valid criterion for them was observability of quantities. Although this view contributed to some advances in the twentieth century, but its drawbacks and misunderstandings caused some proponents of this school to criticize it and to become against it. In this paper, the views of some of the most prominent contemporary physicists, who themselves became one of the followers of this school, is reviewed. We have also mentioned some of the great physicists who pointed out the most important criticisms agaist this school. Furthermore, we have explained the reasons for changing the view of physicists in line with positivism, based on logical criteria and philosophical reasoning. In the end, we look at the views of some of the contemporary physicists who have opposed positivism or have gone through positivism to deny the existence of God.

The principle of complementarity which is based on Heisenberg's principle of uncertainty is one the most controversial theories of quantum physics. The implication of this principle is that there is no absolute truth in the world of science and in turn non-causal picture of nuclear phenomena and non-determination. We are here, encountered with an inherent limitation in principle, not just in practice. The wave-particle duality has been at the heart of quantum mechanics. Einstein believed that one could confirm both wave-like and particle-like behaviors in the same interferometry  experiment. Although Einstein ultimately failed to achieve this goal, professor Afshar managed to show a discrepancy in the predictions of Bohr's principle of complementarity and its consequences. In this paper we report on the ontological consequences of Afshar experiment.

In the present article, at first, some similarities between "causation" and the principle of causal determinism in classical physics and Islamic philosophy will be discussed. Then, the author tries to show how the above concepts are criticized in both epistemic fields by the relevant sciences, i.e. modern physics and Islamic kalam.