Document Type : Extension

Author

دانشجو

Abstract

From the time physicists have proposed the quantum logic, this logic is formed somehow in relation with quantum mechanics and experiences based on it. In fact, quantum mechanics and experiences gained from it assumed an approval to this logic.
One of the highlights of the quantum mechanics, is uncertainty principle, which is a doctrine to reject the divisibility in quantum logic. Also EPR is assumed as a doctrine to reject the quantum mechanics. In the case of rejection of quantum mechanics, does the quantum logic also be questioned?
In this paper it is shown that the uncertainty principle is rejecting the divisibility principle and EPR
The aim of this study is to show that the uncertainty principal rejects divisibility principal, and hidden-variable theory which comes after EPR paradox, known as a rival theory, (even in the case of rejection of standard quantum mechanics) doesn’t reject the quantum logic. The outcome of this is that in practice quantum logic is independent of quantum mechanics, and it might be applied in areas other than quantum mechanics.

Keywords

Bell, J. S. (1966). On the problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. Reviews of Modern Physics, 38(3), 447.
 
Birkhoff, G., & Von Neumann, J. (1936). The logic of quantum mechanics. Annals of mathematics, 823-843.
Bohm, D. (1952). A suggested interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of" hidden" variables. I. Physical review, 85(2), 166.
Bohr, N. (1935). Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?. Physical review, 48(8), 696.
Born, M. (1926). Quantum mechanics of collision processes. Uspekhi Fizich.
Capaldi, N. (1966). Philosophy of science: The historical development of scientific concepts and their philosophical implications (Vol. 868). Monarch Press.
Dummett, M. (1978). Truth and other enigmas. Harvard University Press.
Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., & Rosen, N. (1935). Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?. Physical review, 47(10), 777.
El Naschie, M. S. (2007). Hilbert space, Poincaré dodecahedron and golden mean transfiniteness. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 31(4), 787-793.
Feyerabend, P. (1958). Reichenbach's interpretation of quantum-mechanics. Philosophical Studies, 9(4), 49-59.
Foreman, S., Moss, A., & Scott, D. (2011). Predicted constraints on cosmic string tension from Planck and future CMB polarization measurements. Physical Review D, 84(4), 043522.
Heisenberg, W. (1949). The physical principles of the quantum theory. Courier Corporation.
Heisenberg, W.K. (1930). The phyical principles of the Quantum theory. Chicago. Dover.
Hilgevoord, J., & Uffink, J. (2001). The uncertainty principle.
Kochen, S., & Specker, E. P. (1975). The problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. In The logico-algebraic approach to quantum mechanics (pp. 293-328). Springer, Dordrecht.
Lukasiewicz, J. (1920). On three-valued logic. Ruch filozoficzny, 5(170-171).
Putnam, H. (1957). Three-valued logic. Philosophical Studies, 8(5), 73-80.
Putnam, H. (1969). Is logic empirical?. In Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Springer, Dordrecht (pp.216-241).
Quine, W. V. (1961). From a logical point of view: Nine logico-philosophical essays (No. 566). Harvard University Press.
Reichenbach, H. (1944). Philosophic Foundations of Quantum. Mechanics. Univ. of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.
Reichenbach, H. (1998). Philosophic foundations of quantum mechanics. Courier Corporation.
Schrödinger, E. (1926). An undulatory theory of the mechanics of atoms and molecules. Physical review, 28(6), 1049.
Stairs, A. (2015). Could logic be empirical? The Putnam-Kripke debate (p.23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 Van Fraassen, B. C. (1974). The labyrinth of quantum logics. In Logical and Epistemological Studies in Contemporary Physics (pp. 224-254). Springer, Dordrecht.
Wilce, A. (2002). QuaWilce, A. (2002). Quantum logic and probability theory. ntum logic and probability theory.
Zawirski, Z. (1931). ``Attempts at application of many-valued logic to contemporary science''. Sprawozdania Poznan skiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciof Nauk, 2(4), 6.