DOI: 10.14704/nq.2018.16.9.1368

Ontology of Quantum Entangled States No Needs Philosophy

Michele Caponigro

Abstract


When we understand, usually philosophical debates disappear. In this brief paper, starting from some works, we argue that quantum entangled states could be considered as primitive. We analyze from a conceptual point of view this basic question: can the nature of quantum entangled states be interpreted ontologically or epistemologically? According to some works, the degrees of freedom (and the tool of quantum partitions) of quantum systems permit us to establish a possible classification between factorizable and entangled states. We suggest, that the "choice" of degree of freedom (or quantum partitions), even if mathematically justified introduces an epistemic element, not only in the systems but also in their classification. We retain, instead, that there are not two classes of quantum states, entangled and factorizable, but only a single class of states: the entangled states. In fact, the factorizable states become entangled for a different choice of their degrees of freedom (i.e. they are entangled with respect to other observables). In the same way, there are no partitions of quantum systems which have an ontologically superior status with respect to any other. For all these reasons, both mathematical tools utilize(i.e quantum partitions or degrees of freedom) are responsible for creating an improper classification of quantum systems. Finally, we argue that we cannot speak about a classification of quantum systems: all quantum states exhibit a uniquely objective nature, they are all entangled states. In this framework we think that Rovelli’s interpretation of QM based on the relational approach could be considered a good candidate to understand the nature of physical reality.

Keywords


Ontology of Quantum entanglement, subsystems (partitions and factorizables states), epistemic vs ontic elements, quantum reality

Full Text:

PDF

References


De la Torre AC, Goyeneche D, Leitao L. Entanglement for all quantum states. European Journal of Physics 2010; 31(2):325-32.

Zanardi P. Virtual quantum subsystems. Physical Review Letters 2001; 87(7): 077901.

Viola L, Barnum H. Entanglement and subsystems, entanglement beyond subsystems, and all that. Philosophy of Quantum Information and Entanglement; Bokulich, A., Jaeger, G., Eds. 2010: 16-43.

Schrödinger E. Discussion of Probability Relations Between Separated Systems. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 1936; 31(4): 555-63.

Giannetto E. Some remarks on non-separability, in the foundations of quantum mechanics. C. Garola, A. Rossi (eds.), Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1995: 315-24.


Supporting Agencies

I would like to thank my supervisor Prof. Enrico Giannetto (Bergamo University).



| NeuroScience + QuantumPhysics> NeuroQuantology :: Copyright 2001-2018