Composite Observers, Empirical Adequacy, and the Combination Problem in Relational Quantum Mechanics: a Reply to Adlam

IF 1 3区 物理与天体物理 Q3 PHYSICS, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Timotheus Riedel
{"title":"Composite Observers, Empirical Adequacy, and the Combination Problem in Relational Quantum Mechanics: a Reply to Adlam","authors":"Timotheus Riedel","doi":"10.1007/s10701-025-00853-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Relational Quantum Mechanics posits that facts about the properties of physical systems are relative to other systems. As recently pointed out by Adlam, this gives rise to the question of the relationship between the facts that obtain relative to complex systems and the facts that obtain relative to their constituents. In this paper, I respond to Adlam’s discussion of what she calls the Combination Problem. My starting point is a maximally permissive default view according to which any collection of systems counts as a new system and composites inherit all facts that obtain relative to their constituents. Subsequently, I advance three main claims: First, that Adlam’s arguments in favour of a more restrictive approach are not compelling. Second, that even if they were, she is wrong to claim that a ‘tamed’ version of RQM with postulated links between perspectives is in a better position to support such a restrictive approach. And third, that the possibly most difficult aspect of the Combination Problem in fact pertains to the combination of quantum states and probabilities. While significant challenges for the permissive solution arise here, I argue that they are likely to arise for any plausible response to the Combination Problem. More tentatively, I propose a strategy to mitigate the difficulty based on the observer-dependence of relative quantum state assignments. Along the way, I address crucial foundational issues in Relational Quantum Mechanics, from cross-perspective communication to the link between relative facts and experiences to empirical adequacy.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":569,"journal":{"name":"Foundations of Physics","volume":"55 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10701-025-00853-2.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foundations of Physics","FirstCategoryId":"101","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10701-025-00853-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHYSICS, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Relational Quantum Mechanics posits that facts about the properties of physical systems are relative to other systems. As recently pointed out by Adlam, this gives rise to the question of the relationship between the facts that obtain relative to complex systems and the facts that obtain relative to their constituents. In this paper, I respond to Adlam’s discussion of what she calls the Combination Problem. My starting point is a maximally permissive default view according to which any collection of systems counts as a new system and composites inherit all facts that obtain relative to their constituents. Subsequently, I advance three main claims: First, that Adlam’s arguments in favour of a more restrictive approach are not compelling. Second, that even if they were, she is wrong to claim that a ‘tamed’ version of RQM with postulated links between perspectives is in a better position to support such a restrictive approach. And third, that the possibly most difficult aspect of the Combination Problem in fact pertains to the combination of quantum states and probabilities. While significant challenges for the permissive solution arise here, I argue that they are likely to arise for any plausible response to the Combination Problem. More tentatively, I propose a strategy to mitigate the difficulty based on the observer-dependence of relative quantum state assignments. Along the way, I address crucial foundational issues in Relational Quantum Mechanics, from cross-perspective communication to the link between relative facts and experiences to empirical adequacy.

关系量子力学中的复合观察者、经验充分性和组合问题:对Adlam的答复
关系量子力学假定有关物理系统的性质的事实是相对于其他系统的。正如Adlam最近指出的那样,这就产生了一个问题,即相对于复杂系统获得的事实与相对于其组成部分获得的事实之间的关系。在这篇文章中,我回应了Adlam关于她所谓的组合问题的讨论。我的出发点是一个最大限度允许的默认视图,根据这个视图,任何系统的集合都被视为一个新系统,而组合物继承了与它们的组成部分相关的所有事实。随后,我提出了三个主要观点:首先,Adlam支持更严格的方法的论点并不令人信服。其次,即使它们是,她也错误地声称,具有视角之间假定联系的RQM的“驯服”版本能够更好地支持这种限制性方法。第三,组合问题中最困难的部分可能是量子态和概率的组合。虽然这里出现了对允许解决方案的重大挑战,但我认为它们很可能出现在对组合问题的任何合理响应中。更试探性地,我提出了一种基于相对量子态分配的观察者依赖来减轻困难的策略。在此过程中,我讨论了关系量子力学中至关重要的基础问题,从跨视角通信到相对事实和经验之间的联系,再到经验充分性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Foundations of Physics
Foundations of Physics 物理-物理:综合
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
104
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The conceptual foundations of physics have been under constant revision from the outset, and remain so today. Discussion of foundational issues has always been a major source of progress in science, on a par with empirical knowledge and mathematics. Examples include the debates on the nature of space and time involving Newton and later Einstein; on the nature of heat and of energy; on irreversibility and probability due to Boltzmann; on the nature of matter and observation measurement during the early days of quantum theory; on the meaning of renormalisation, and many others. Today, insightful reflection on the conceptual structure utilised in our efforts to understand the physical world is of particular value, given the serious unsolved problems that are likely to demand, once again, modifications of the grammar of our scientific description of the physical world. The quantum properties of gravity, the nature of measurement in quantum mechanics, the primary source of irreversibility, the role of information in physics – all these are examples of questions about which science is still confused and whose solution may well demand more than skilled mathematics and new experiments. Foundations of Physics is a privileged forum for discussing such foundational issues, open to physicists, cosmologists, philosophers and mathematicians. It is devoted to the conceptual bases of the fundamental theories of physics and cosmology, to their logical, methodological, and philosophical premises. The journal welcomes papers on issues such as the foundations of special and general relativity, quantum theory, classical and quantum field theory, quantum gravity, unified theories, thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, cosmology, and similar.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信