量子力学与科学实在论的集合阐释

A. Pechenkin
{"title":"量子力学与科学实在论的集合阐释","authors":"A. Pechenkin","doi":"10.11590/ABHPS.2021.1.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article takes under consideration three versions of the ensemble (statistical) interpretation of quantum mechanics and discusses the interconnection of these interpretations with the philosophy of science. To emphasize the specifics of the problem of interpretation of quantum mechanics in the USSR, the Marxist ideology is taken into account. The present paper continues the author’s previous analysis of ensemble interpretations which emerged in the USA and USSR in the first half of the 20th century. The author emphasizes that the ensemble approach turned out to be a dead end for the development of the interpretation of quantum mechanics in Russia. The article also argues that in Soviet Russia, the classical Copenhagen (standard) approach to quantum mechanics was used. The Copenhagen approach was developed by Lev Landau in 1919–1931 and became the basis of the Landau-Lifshitz famous course on quantum mechanics, one of the classics of twentieth-century physics literature (the first edition was published in 1947). Although Vladimir A. Fock’s approach to the interpretation of quantum mechanics differs from the standard presentation by Lev Landau and Evgeny Lifshitz, Fock put forward a very important principle that complementarity is a “firmly established law of nature”. The fundamental writings of Lev Landau, Vladimir Fock and Igor Tamm, the authors of the mid-twentieth century, did a lot to defend the standard point of view such as the popular interpretations by Landau and Lifshitz. This approach can be traced back to Landau’s early writings and to Fock’s criticism of the ensemble approach.","PeriodicalId":37693,"journal":{"name":"Acta Baltica Historiae et Philosophiae Scientiarum","volume":"9 1","pages":"5-17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Ensemble Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics and Scientific Realism\",\"authors\":\"A. Pechenkin\",\"doi\":\"10.11590/ABHPS.2021.1.01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article takes under consideration three versions of the ensemble (statistical) interpretation of quantum mechanics and discusses the interconnection of these interpretations with the philosophy of science. To emphasize the specifics of the problem of interpretation of quantum mechanics in the USSR, the Marxist ideology is taken into account. The present paper continues the author’s previous analysis of ensemble interpretations which emerged in the USA and USSR in the first half of the 20th century. The author emphasizes that the ensemble approach turned out to be a dead end for the development of the interpretation of quantum mechanics in Russia. The article also argues that in Soviet Russia, the classical Copenhagen (standard) approach to quantum mechanics was used. The Copenhagen approach was developed by Lev Landau in 1919–1931 and became the basis of the Landau-Lifshitz famous course on quantum mechanics, one of the classics of twentieth-century physics literature (the first edition was published in 1947). Although Vladimir A. Fock’s approach to the interpretation of quantum mechanics differs from the standard presentation by Lev Landau and Evgeny Lifshitz, Fock put forward a very important principle that complementarity is a “firmly established law of nature”. The fundamental writings of Lev Landau, Vladimir Fock and Igor Tamm, the authors of the mid-twentieth century, did a lot to defend the standard point of view such as the popular interpretations by Landau and Lifshitz. This approach can be traced back to Landau’s early writings and to Fock’s criticism of the ensemble approach.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37693,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Baltica Historiae et Philosophiae Scientiarum\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"5-17\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Baltica Historiae et Philosophiae Scientiarum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11590/ABHPS.2021.1.01\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Baltica Historiae et Philosophiae Scientiarum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11590/ABHPS.2021.1.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文考虑了量子力学系综(统计)解释的三个版本,并讨论了这些解释与科学哲学的相互联系。为了强调苏联量子力学解释问题的具体性,考虑了马克思主义意识形态。本文继续了作者先前对20世纪上半叶美国和苏联出现的合奏解释的分析。作者强调,系综方法对俄罗斯量子力学解释的发展来说是一条死胡同。文章还认为,在苏俄,量子力学采用了经典的哥本哈根(标准)方法。哥本哈根方法由Lev Landau于1919–1931年提出,并成为Landau Lifshitz著名量子力学课程的基础,该课程是20世纪物理学文献的经典之一(第一版于1947年出版)。尽管Vladimir A.Fock对量子力学的解释方法不同于Lev Landau和Evgeny Lifshitz的标准表述,但Fock提出了一个非常重要的原则,即互补性是“牢固确立的自然定律”。二十世纪中期的作家列夫·兰道、弗拉基米尔·福克斯和伊戈尔·塔姆的基础著作为标准观点做了大量的辩护,如兰道和利夫希茨的通俗解释。这种方法可以追溯到兰道早期的著作和福克斯对合奏方法的批评。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Ensemble Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics and Scientific Realism
The article takes under consideration three versions of the ensemble (statistical) interpretation of quantum mechanics and discusses the interconnection of these interpretations with the philosophy of science. To emphasize the specifics of the problem of interpretation of quantum mechanics in the USSR, the Marxist ideology is taken into account. The present paper continues the author’s previous analysis of ensemble interpretations which emerged in the USA and USSR in the first half of the 20th century. The author emphasizes that the ensemble approach turned out to be a dead end for the development of the interpretation of quantum mechanics in Russia. The article also argues that in Soviet Russia, the classical Copenhagen (standard) approach to quantum mechanics was used. The Copenhagen approach was developed by Lev Landau in 1919–1931 and became the basis of the Landau-Lifshitz famous course on quantum mechanics, one of the classics of twentieth-century physics literature (the first edition was published in 1947). Although Vladimir A. Fock’s approach to the interpretation of quantum mechanics differs from the standard presentation by Lev Landau and Evgeny Lifshitz, Fock put forward a very important principle that complementarity is a “firmly established law of nature”. The fundamental writings of Lev Landau, Vladimir Fock and Igor Tamm, the authors of the mid-twentieth century, did a lot to defend the standard point of view such as the popular interpretations by Landau and Lifshitz. This approach can be traced back to Landau’s early writings and to Fock’s criticism of the ensemble approach.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Baltica Historiae et Philosophiae Scientiarum sees its mission in offering publishing opportunities for Baltic and non-Baltic scholars in the field of the history and philosophy of natural and social sciences (including legal studies) to promote and further international cooperation between scholars of different countries in this field.
期刊最新文献
What Does ‘φ-Scientificity’ Mean? I. Models and Measurement: Galileo Practical Realism and the Philosophy of Science and Technology Value Conflicts as Value Indicators The Problem of Realism in Vihalemm Cybernetic Epistemology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1