Quantum Physics & The Law Of Excluded Middle

  • Thread starter Thread starter MindOverMatter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MindOverMatter

Guest
Its beginning to dawn on me that “Quantum-Naturalists” are claiming that Quantum physics disproves the law of excluded middle. If i was an atheist i would probably hold to such a position as i too can see the benefit of such a belief as it would seem to challenge the very notion of causality and contradiction as an absolute principle of changing beings and truth. Astute thinkers will know that this would be a very bad thing for Aquinas. Personally, as you probably well know, i see no logical reason to believe that things happen for no reason (* i have presented arguments in other threads*). Observation is simply not enough to convince me otherwise because i believe that causality is a principle of logic, not just a principle of observation. Hence; if something were to look as if it appeared out of nothing or have no deterministic cause, it would still be unreasonable for me to conclude that i have empirical evidence that something came out of nothing or changed by itself. The most reasonable thing would be to conclude that all effects have causes. However, if you remove any good reason to make logical statements at all, then there is a problem.

1. Assuming that Quantum physics does remove the law of excluded middle, does this not mean that that all logical interpretation therefore collapses?

2. If logic is not undermined, then how does Quantum physics effect Causality as a principle of logic?

I would like to see what ideas or arguments that other catholics have formulated.
 
Perhaps it might be best to start by defining quantum physics as you understand it. Can you let us know what books or papers you have read on the subject? Perhaps provide a link or two? As with so many thing there is a considerable amount of misinformation concerning quantum physics so it’s important to have a solid foundation for the discussion.
 
MindOverMatter said:
Its beginning to dawn on me that “Quantum-Naturalists” are claiming that Quantum physics disproves the law of excluded middle. If i was an atheist i would probably hold to such a position as i too can see the benefit of such a belief as it would seem to challenge the very notion of causality and contradiction as an absolute principle of changing beings and truth. Astute thinkers will know that this would be a very bad thing for Aquinas. Personally, as you probably well know, i see no logical reason to believe that things happen for no reason (* i have presented arguments in other threads*). Observation is simply not enough to convince me otherwise because i believe that causality is a principle of logic, not just a principle of observation. Hence; if something were to look as if it appeared out of nothing or have no deterministic cause, it would still be unreasonable for me to conclude that i have empirical evidence that something came out of nothing or changed by itself. The most reasonable thing would be to conclude that all effects have causes. However, if you remove any good reason to make logical statements at all, then there is a problem.

1. Assuming that Quantum physics does remove the law of excluded middle, does this not mean that that all logical interpretation therefore collapses?

2. If logic is not undermined, then how does Quantum physics effect Causality as a principle of logic?

I would like to see what ideas or arguments that other catholics have formulated.
Click to expand...
The principle of the excluded middle may be defined in the lattice of the subspaces of a Hilbert space which correspond to quantum mechanical propositions. According to the following article it can be shown that : "in addition to the already established laws of effective quantum logic, the principle of excluded middle can also be founded. "
Please see: springerlink.com/content/t503067136161v8w/
The principle of excluded middle in quantum logic
Journal of Philosophical Logic
Springer Netherlands
ISSN 0022-3611 (Print) 1573-0433 (Online)
Issue Volume 7, Number 1 / January, 1978
Pages 181-208
 
After taking a couple of courses in Quantum Physics, I decided my skills would be more profitably employed in other areas of physics. For me it needed a Law of the Excluded Muddle. 😃
 
Camron said:
LOL! Good one! :rotfl:
Click to expand...
I think it is going to depend on how you define the Law of the Excluded Middle (LEM). For example, if you say that LEM is that you cannot have an intermediate state between two mutually exclusive states, then LEM is not true even in the real world as we know it. Consider a die and the two mutually exclusive propositions that when you toss a die, it will come up a one or it will come up a six. These are mutually exclusive and you can’t have both happen at once, but there are four other middle possibilities for the experiment. Quamtum mechanics deals in probabilities that an event will occur and these probabilities do not give a deterministic predicition of the future event.
 
Your mixing apples and oranges. There are hundreds of thousands of kinds of logic. There is no single logic that applies to every consideration. Alfred North Whitehead wrote a proof…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top