87373 - Philosophy of Physics (1) (LM)

Learning outcomes

This course pursues one main goal, namely, to allow students to gain philosophical insights into the physical image of the world. The investigation of key conceptual issues arising from modern physics, such as the character of physical law, the “reality” of observable phenomena, the difference between prediction and explanation, will also guide students to see the role played by mathematics in clarifying difficulties experienced by philosophy with those questions.

Course contents

Exploring the Nature of Multiverse

How does quantum theory change our understanding of physical knowledge?

Here is an insightful passage from the physicist John A. Wheeler (1982): “One who comes from an older time and is accustomed to the picture of the universe as a machine built out of ‘atoms’ is not only baffled but put off when he reads [...] Leibniz’s conception of the ultimate building unit, the monad.” According to Wheeler, what Leibniz wrote about the “monad” is more relevant to the “quantum phenomenon” than to anything one has ever called an “atom”. The very word “phenomenon”, as Wheeler remarked, is the result of a long lasting debate between Bohr and Einstein about the logical self-consistency of quantum theory and its implications for reality: “No elementary phenomenon is a phenomenon until it is a registered (observed) phenomenon.”

What "physical reality" emerges from the quantum phenomenon? How can one trace it back to Leibniz's Monadology? This course pursues one main goal, namely, to contrast the rationale behind the "monad" with the rationale behind the "quantum". Such a contrast will be focused on from a mathematical and philosophical perspective.

Readings/Bibliography

Leibniz G. W. [1714], Monadology, in Philosophical Essays, Ariew R., Garber D. (eds), Hackett Publishing Company, Indianapolis & Cambridge 1989

Wheeler J. A. (1982), "The Computer and the Universe", Int. J. Theor. Phys. 1982, 21 (pp. 557-572) 

Wheeler J. A. (1986), "How Come the Quantum?", Annals NY Academy of Science (pp. 304-316)

  

Essays

Science and Ultimate Reality. Quantum Theory, Cosmology, and Complexity, a cura di J. D. Barrow, P. C. W. Davies, and. C. L. Harper Jr., Cambridge UP, Cambridge 2004

• Davies P. W., «John Archibald Wheeler and the clash of ideas», (pp. 3-23)
• Pelikan J., «The heritage of Heraclitus: John Archibald Wheeler and the itch to speculate», (pp. 27-41)

1. Deutsch D., «It from Qubit», (pp. 90-102)
   
2. Hardy L., «Why is Nature Described by Quantum Theory?», (pp. 45-71)
3. Tegmark M., «Parallel Universes», (pp. 459-491)
4. Zeilinger A., «Why the quantum? “It” from “bit”? A participatory universe? Three far-reaching challenges from John Archibald Wheeler and their relation to experiment», (pp. 201-220)
   

Einstein A., Podolsky B., Rosen N. (1935), «Can Quantum Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?», Physical Review 47

Ekert A. (2014), «Random, Complex, and Quantum», in The Art of Science. From Perspective Drawing to Quantum Randomness, R. Lupacchini & A. Angelini (eds), Springer, Cham (pp. 191-204) 

Weyl H. [1954], «The Unity of Knowledge», in Mind and Nature, a cura di P. Pesic, Princeton UP, Princeton 2009

Wheeler J. A. (1986), «Hermann Weyl and the Unity of Knowledge», American Scientist, 74 (pp. 366-375)

 

As Introduction to Quantum Concepts:

Scarani V. [2003], Quantum Physics. A First Encounter, Oxford UP, Oxford 2006 

 

Further Reading

• Aczel A. D. (2001), Entanglement. The Greatest Mistery in Physics, Four Walls Eight Windows, New York

• Deutsch D. (2011), The Beginning of Infinity, Penguin, London

• Lloyd S. (2006), Programming the Universe. A Quantum Computer Scientist Takes on the Cosmos, A. A. Knopf, New York  

• Saunders S. et al. (eds), Many Worlds? Everett, Quantum Theory, and Reality, Oxford UP 2010

•  Wallace D. (2012), The Emergent Multiverse, Oxford UP

• Zeilinger A. (2003), Einsteins Schleier. Die neue Welt der Quantenphysik, Verlag C. H. Beck oHG, München

Teaching methods

Lectures

Assessment methods

Oral examination

Marks:

30 cum laude - excellent as to knowledge, philosophical lexicon and critical expression.

30 – Excellent: knowledge is complete, well argued and correctly expressed, with some slight faults.

27-29 – Good: thorough and satisfactory knowledge; essentially correct expression.

24-26 - Fairly good: knowledge broadly acquired, and not always correctly expressed.

21-23 – Sufficient: superficial and partial knowledge; exposure and articulation are incomplete and often not sufficiently appropriate

18-21 - Almost sufficient: superficial and decontextualized knowledge. The exposure of the contents shows important gaps.

Exam failed - Basic skills and knowledge are not sufficiently acquired. Students are requested to show up at a subsequent exam session.

Office hours

See the website of Rossella Lupacchini