Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
|
2014:berislav_zarnic [2014/07/01 08:34] berislav |
2014:berislav_zarnic [2015/05/18 23:06] (current) berislav [Disjunctive Facts and Superposition of States] |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | |||
| ====== Disjunctive Facts and Superposition of States ====== | ====== Disjunctive Facts and Superposition of States ====== | ||
| Line 4: | Line 5: | ||
| \\ <fs 75%> //Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Split//</fs> | \\ <fs 75%> //Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Split//</fs> | ||
| - | <blockquote>**Abstract**</blockquote> | + | <blockquote>{{ :schrodinger_cat.png|}}**Abstract** |
| + | Let us denote by $\mathsf{descriptum}(p \sqcup q)$ the unobservable state of affairs described by the 'quantum disjunction' of basic physical propositions $p$ and $q$ describing mutually exclusive (`orthogonal') observable states. | ||
| + | No such disjunctively composed state of affairs is allowed by //Tractarian// postulate of unique mode of composition of states of affairs. | ||
| + | Quite the opposite holds true in the (realistic interpretation of) quantum mechanics: it allows mutually exclusive states of affairs of the same object and the same magnitude to co-exist. | ||
| + | If co-existence of orthogonal states is admitted, then a different kind of picture relation must be introduced to account for possibility of describing this kind of reality. | ||
| + | A new logico-metaphysical situation appears when metaphysics allows for disjunctive composition of states of affairs and when logic accepts the possibility of linguistic representation of the disjunctive composition. | ||
| + | |||
| + | </blockquote> | ||
| + | ---- | ||
| {{amazon>en:9400793782 noprice =0}} | {{amazon>en:9400793782 noprice =0}} | ||