Abstract
The topic to be discussed here, laws in quantum mechanics (QM), is important to me because of the particular account of explanation which I subscribe to. I have called this account the instance view (Forge 1986a). It can be summarised as follows: Something is explained when it is shown to be part of, i.e., an instance of, some suitable pattern in the world. The instance view therefore falls under what has come to be called the ontic conception of explanation.1 The project of developing the theory of explanation along these lines then comprises two main tasks: identifying suitable patterns and showing how ‘things’ fit into them. The former is perhaps the more important, and the more testing, for the philosophy of science, for it is not very helpful to take “suitable” to mean “explanatory”. We need some independent characterisation of what makes a pattern suitable for the purposes of explanation.
I would like to thank the editor for his kind invitation to write a paper for this volume and to the anonymous referee for helpful and perceptive comments on an earlier draft.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Albert, D.Z. (1992), Quantum Mechanics and Experience. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Armstrong, D.M. (1978), Universals and Scientific Realism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Armstrong, D.M. (1983), What is a Law of Nature? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Balzer, W., C.U. Moulines and J.D. Sneed (1987), An Architectonic for Science. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Beltrametti, E.G. and G. Cassinelli (1980), The Logic of Quantum Mechanics. Reading Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
Cushing, J.T. (1989), ‘Background Essay’ in J.T. Cushing and E. McMullin (eds.) Philosophical Consequences of Quantum Theory. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, pp.1–24.
Ellis, B. (1966), Basic Concepts of Measurement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, B. (1992), ‘Conventionalism in Measurement Theory’ in C. Wade Savage and P. Ehrlich (eds) Philosophical and Foundational Issues in Measurement Theory. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum pp. 167–180.
Forge, J.C. (1986a), ‘The Instance View of Explanation’, Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 64, pp.127–142.
Forge, J.C. (1986b), ‘David Armstrong on Functional Laws’, Philosophy of Science 53, pp.584–587.
Forge, J.C. (1993a), ‘How Should We Explain Remote Correlations?’, Philosophica 51, pp.83–104.
Forge, J.C. (1993b), ‘The Modal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics’, Victorian Centre for History and Philosophy of Science Preprint Series, 3/93.
Forrest, P. (1988), Quantum Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hughes, R.I.G. (1989), The Structure and Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Redhead, M. (1987), Incompleteness, Nonlocality, and Realism. A Prolegomenon to the Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Margenau, H. (1950), The Nature of Physical Reality. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Piron, C. (1976), Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. New York: Benjamin.
van Fraassen, B.C. (1991), Quantum Mechanics: An Empiricist View. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1996 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Forge, J. (1996). Laws and States in Quantum Mechanics. In: Riggs, P.J. (eds) Natural Kinds, Laws of Nature and Scientific Methodology. Australasian Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, vol 12. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8607-8_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8607-8_10
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4750-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-015-8607-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive