How Science Challenges our Notions of Reality

The Parable of the Three Umpires

…or three different views of reality

Umpire Number One

The naïve realist

I call them as they are!

Umpire Number Two

The critical realist

I call them as I see them!

Umpire Number One

The “quantum” or anti-realist

They ain’t nuthin until I call them!

We may believe in the existence of an external world but the real question is how do we acquire knowledge of this world? Naive Realist Critical Realist Other forms of “realist” positions Anti-realism

The “Folly” of Being Too Literal… Galileo and Joshua 10

If the Sun stood still

Galileo’s argument did not contradict validity of scripture - it showed that the GEOCENTRIC view did!

Is there more to seeing than meets the eye?

Newton’s Rules for Scientific Reasoning1. We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are

both true and sufficient to explain their appearances.

2. Therefore to the same natural effects we must, as far as possible, assign the same causes.

3. The qualities of bodies, which admit neither intension nor remission of degrees, and which are found to belong to all bodies within the reach of our experiments, are to be esteemed the universal qualities of all bodies whatsoever.

4. In experimental philosophy we are to look upon propositions collected by general induction from phænomena as accurately or very nearly true, notwithstanding any contrary hypotheses that may be imagined, till such time as other phænomena occur, by which they may either be made more accurate, or liable to exceptions.

The Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Gather Observations/Data

Formulate a hypothesis to explain the observations

Deduce by logical extension a possible test ie – make a

prediction

Test the prediction NO – discard hypothesis

YES - continue

The 19th Century – Consolidation and Cracks! In the words of Thomas Kuhn a powerful

paradigm (Classical or Newtonian Physics) had emerged … but just what does this mean?

At its heart it means that you “see” the world through the paradigm

This is a controversial idea! Not all (many) do not accept Kuhn’s position

Emergence of Chemistry, Physics and other Disciplines Priestly discovery of Oxygen and other unseen

gases Dalton’s Law of Fixed Ratios – revival of the

“atomic hypothesis” Phlogiston – explaining heat Charles Lyell Principles of Geology

– introduces notion of deep time Darwin’s voyage on HMS Beagle

Maxwell combined electric and magnetic phenomena into one!

Maxwell’s Great Synthesis (1864)

The “world” was becoming increasingly mathematical and abstract

Problem of Realism Do scientific theories “mirror” the world? – Do atoms exist

or are they theoretic constructs? How do minds influence theories which in turn influence

observation which in turn… Is the world “real” and knowable – Is our knowledge

gained through scientific observation accurately describing an underlying reality?

Naïve realism – scientific theories and their constructs “map” directly to an independently existing world

Critical realism - scientific theories and their constructs will always operate as metaphors or incomplete models of an independently existing world

Cracks in the Foundation!

The persistent (and annoying!) problem of blackbody spectra

Failure of the Michelson-Morley Experiment

…building ein besser light bulb!

It’s Worse than They Thought! How Planck and Einstein “fixed” the cracks… The Michelson-Morley experiment revealed

something startling about the nature of time! Time and simultaneity were not “absolute”

concepts but frame dependent - or – motion affects time!

Mass and energy are equivalent at a fundamental level

Discovery of the Quantum Even more deeply troubling was the

discovery that the universe is quantized Light is both a particle and a wave! A first glimpse at Quantum Weirdness!

The Wave-Particle Duality

At its core quantum physics exposes a deep puzzle - the “basic stuff” of the universe is, in a profoundly disturbing way, beyond our ability to capture or “enframe” in language.

An electron, for example, can exhibit both “wave” or “particle” behaviour depending on how we interact with it.

The Birth of Quantum Theory… From 1925 – 1930 a

radically new way to look at the physical world was developed

Quantum Theory is one of the most successful theories ever devised

It has yet to “fail” a test given it

… but

Copenhagen Interpretation There is no underlying physical reality

We create reality through our interaction with the world

Physics cannot tell us what the world is “really made of” – Bohr would argue that this question ultimately has no meaning.

Quantum theory deals with possibilities and probabilities – the world takes on an indeterminacy

Despite this QT still is a mathematically precise (and in a new sense) can still be a deterministic theory

Some Highlights…

Wave-particle duality

Quantum Weirdness andNon-locality

Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle

Particle in a box

Electrondiffraction

Compton scattering

Schroedinger’s Cat

entanglement

?

QT comes in Many Flavours!

Many-Worlds and the Cat!

What do we “make of this”? QT is the best physical theory we have ever devised! It

forms the bed-rock on which modern physics, chemistry and biochemistry is built.

QT cannot provide us with a picture of the quantum world that we can fully comprehend at a conceptual level – the “quantum world” is quite unlike the macroscopic world that we live in

Is the material world fully comprehensible?

Realist Conceptions of the World The patterns and measurements of science,

indeed what we “see” in the world, bear a relation to an underlying reality the existence of which is independent of human observers

Quantum theory (certainly the Copenhagen view) seriously challenges this

Anti-realism (including constructivism and “participatory realism”)

What are the deeper implications for claims come from other field of discourse – Theology?

Schroedinger’s “thought experiment” to demonstrate the absurdity of the Copenhagen Interpretation

Schroedinger’s Cat

An Epic Poem...Dear Cecil:Cecil, you're my final hopeOf finding out the true Straight DopeFor I have been reading of Schroedinger's catBut none of my cats are at all like that.This unusual animal (so it is said)Is simultaneously live and dead!What I don't understand is just why heCan't be one or other, unquestionably.My future now hangs in between eigenstates.In one I'm enlightened, the other I ain't.If you understand, Cecil, then show me the wayAnd rescue my psyche from quantum decay.But if this queer thing has perplexed even you,Then I will and won't see you in Schroedinger's zoo.--Randy F., Chicago

An Epic Reply...Dear Randy:Schroedinger, Erwin! Professor of physics!Wrote daring equations! Confounded his critics!(Not bad, eh? Don't worry. This part of the verseStarts off pretty good, but it gets a lot worse.)When saw that the theory that Newton'd inventedBy Einstein's discov'ries had been badly dented.What now? wailed his colleagues. Said Erwin, "Don't panic,No grease monkey I, but a quantum mechanic.Consider electrons. Now, these teeny articlesAre sometimes like waves, and then sometimes like particles.If that's not confusing, the nuclear danceOf electrons and suchlike is governed by chance!No sweat, though--my theory permits us to judgeWhere some of 'em is and the rest of 'em was."Not everyone bought this. It threatened to wreckThe comforting linkage of cause and effect.

E'en Einstein had doubts, and so Schroedinger triedTo tell him what quantum mechanics implied.Said Win to Al, "Brother, suppose we've a cat,And inside a tube we have put that cat at--Along with a solitaire deck and some Fritos,A bottle of Night Train, a couple mosquitoes(Or something else rhyming) and, oh, if you got 'em,One vial prussic acid, one decaying ottomOr atom--whatever--but when it emits,A trigger device blasts the vial into bitsWhich snuffs our poor kitty. The odds of this crimeAre 50 to 50 per hour each time.

The cylinder's sealed. The hour's passed away. IsOur pussy still purring--or pushing up daisies?Now, you'd say the cat either lives or it don'tBut quantum mechanics is stubborn and won't.Statistically speaking, the cat (goes the joke),Is half a cat breathing and half a cat croaked.To some this may seem a ridiculous split,But quantum mechanics must answer, "Tough @#&!We may not know much, but one thing's fo' sho':There's things in the cosmos that we cannot know.Shine light on electrons--you'll cause them to swerve.The act of observing disturbs the observed--Which ruins your test. But then if there's no testingTo see if a particle's moving or resting

Why try to conjecture? Pure useless endeavor!We know probability--certainty, never.'The effect of this notion? I very much fear'Twill make doubtful all things that were formerly clear.Till soon the cat doctors will say in reports,"We've just flipped a coin and we've learned he's a corpse."'So saith Herr Erwin. Quoth Albert, "You're nuts.God doesn't play dice with the universe, putz.I'll prove it!" he said, and the Lord knows he tried--In vain--until fin'ly he more or less died.Win spoke at the funeral: "Listen, dear friends,Sweet Al was my buddy. I must make amends.Though he doubted my theory, I'll say of this saint:Ten-to-one he's in heaven--but five bucks says he ain't."

--CECIL ADAMS

It looks like Heisenberg - I think, I’m pretty sureI’m pretty sure, I’m not certain...

The UncertaintyPrinciple