Quantum physics and language

Abstract

A novel theory, when it appears, cannot but use old words to label new concepts. In some cases, the extension in meaning thus conferred to standard terminology is natural enough so that the transfer may not lead to too many misunderstandings. Most often, however, and especially when the conceptual gap between the old and the new theory is a wide one, a casual transfer of términology may lead to epistemological and pedagogical difficulties. This situation has been and still is particularly serious in quantum theory. Here, the careless use of words taken from classical physics — such as quantum “mechanics”, “uncertainty”, etc. — , is compounded by the uncritical use of interpretative terms linked to a definite, if implicit, philosophical point of view — such as “complementarity”, “wave-particle duality”, “observables”, etc. While these words and the ideas they represent have played a major role in the birth of quantum physics more than half a century ago, they are no longer necessarily the best ones to be used today. It is not argued here that we should start afresh and create from scratch a supposedly adequate vocabulary for quantum physics. Abuse of language certainly is unavoidable in science as it is in any human communication; without it, language would not live and evolve. But, at the very least, let us recognize it for what it is, so that it does not add its troubles to already complicated issues. And in some definite instances, still, a willing effort to replace specially ambiguous words might be worthwhile.