Advertisement

Foundations of Physics

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 43–62 | Cite as

Particles, particle labels, and quanta: The toll of unacknowledged metaphysics

  • Michael Redhead
  • Paul Teller
Part IV. Invited Papers Dedicated To John Stewart Bell

Abstract

The practice of describing multiparticle quantum systems in terms of labeled particles indicates that we think of quantum entities as individuatable. The labels, together with particle indistinguishability, create the need for symmetrization or antisymmetrization (or, in principle, higher-order symmetries), which in turn results in “surplus formal structure” in the formalism, formal structure which corresponds to nothing in the real world. We argue that these facts show quanta to be unindividuatable entities, things in principle incapable of supporting labels, and so things which support no factual difference_if two of them are thought of as being switched. When thinking of the metaphysics of quanta, we should eschew the misleading labels of the tensor product Hilbert space formalism and prefer the ontologically more faithful description of the Fock space formalism. This conception eliminates puzzles about the quantum statistics of bosons.

Keywords

Hilbert Space Quantum Statistic Tensor Product Formal Structure Quantum System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    P. French and M. Redhead, “Quantum physics and the identity of indiscernibles,”Br. J. Philos. Sci. 39, 233–246 (1988).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. B. Hartle and J. R. Taylor, “Quantum mechanics of paraparticles,”Phys. Rev. 178, 2043–51 (1969).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. M. L. Messiah and O. W. Greenberg, “Symmetrization postulate and its experimental foundation,”Phys. Rev. B 136, 248–67 (1964).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Y. Ohnuki and S. Kamefuchi,Quantum Field Theory and Parastatistics (University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo, and Springer, Berlin, 1982).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. R. Post, “Individuality and Physics,”The Listener 70, 534–537 (1963).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. L. G. Redhead, “Symmetry in intertheory relations,”Synthese 32, 77–112 (1975).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. L. G. Redhead, “A philosopher looks at quantum field theory,” in Harvey R. Brown and Rom Harre, eds.,Philosophical Foundations of Quantum Field Theory (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1988), pp. 9–23.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. H. Stolt and J. R. Taylor, “Correspondence between the first and second quantized theory of paraparticles,”Nuc. Phys. B 19, 1–19 (1970).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. Teller, “A prolegomenon to the proper interpretation of quantum field theory,” to appear inPhilos. Sci. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Redhead
    • 1
  • Paul Teller
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of History and Philosophy of ScienceCambridge UniversityCambridgeUnited Kingdom
  2. 2.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of CaliforniaDavis

Personalised recommendations