This article probes the question of what interpretations of quantum mechanics actually accomplish. In other domains, which are briefly considered, interpretations serve to make alien systematizations intelligible to us. This often involves clarifying the status of their implicit ontology. A survey of interpretations of non-relativistic quantum mechanics supports the evaluation that these interpretations make a contribution to philosophy, but not to physics. Interpretations of quantum field theory are polarized by the divergence between the Lagrangian field theory, which leads to the Standard Model of Particle physics and the Algebraic quantum field theory that discounts an ontology of particles. Ruetsche’s interpretation offers a potential for loosening the sharp polarization that presently obtains. A brief evaluation focuses on the functional ontology of quantum field theory considered as an effective theory.
KeywordsInterpretationQuantum MechanicsQuantum Field TheoryOntology
Aczel, A. D. (2001). Entanglement: The Greatest Mystery in Physics. New York: Four Walls Eight Windows.
Albert, D. Z. (1992). Quantum Mechanics and Experience. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Albert, D., & Loewer, B. (1988). Interpreting the Many-Worlds Interpretation. Synthese, 77, 195-213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00869434
Altmanspacher, H., & Primas, H. (2002). Epistemic and Ontic Quantum Realities.
Auyang, S. (1995). How Is Quantum Field Theory Possible? New York: Oxford University Press.
Bell, J. S. (1964). On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox. Physics, 1, 195-200.
Bitbol, M. (1996). Mécanique Quantique. Paris: Flammarion.
Bitbol, M. (1998). Some Steps towards a Transcendental Deduction of Quantum Mechanics. Philosophia Naturalis, 35, 299- 328.
Bitbol, M. (2002). Science as If Situation Mattered. Phenomenology and Cognitive Science, 1, 181-224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1020328422900
Bitbol, M. (2007). Ontology, Matter and Emergence. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 6, 293-307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11097-006-9041-z
Bub, J. (1974). The Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2229-3
Busch, P., Grabowski, M., & Lahti, P. (1995). Operational Quantum Physics. New York: Springer Verlag.
Carnap, R. (1960). Der logische Aufbau der Welt. Berlin: Weltkeis Verlag.
Castellani, E. (2002). Reductionism, Emergence, and Effective Field Theories. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 33, 251-267. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1355-2198(02)00003-5
Chevalley, C. (1990). La Physique de Heidegger. Les Etudes Philosophiques, No. 3, 289-311.
Conacher, D. J. (1967). Euripidean Drama: Myth, Theme and Structure. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Critchley, S., Schroeder, W. R., & Bernstein, J. (1998). A Companion to Continental Philosophy. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Crossan, J. D. (1991). The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant. San Francisco, CA: Harper.
Daneri, A., Loinger, A., & Prosperi, M. (1962). Quantum Theory of Measurement and Ergodicity Conditions. Nuclear Physics, 33, 297-319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0029-5582(62)90528-x
Darrigol, O. (1992). From C-Numbers to Q-Numbers: The Classical Analogy in the History of Quantum Theory. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Diecks, D. (1986). On the Relevance of the Bell Inequalities to the Problem of Locality in Quantum Mechanics. Physics Letters A, 117, 433-435. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0375-9601(86)90397-X
Feynman, R. P., Leighton, R. B., & Sands, M. (1963). The Feynman Lectures on Physics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Halvorson, H., & Clifton, R. (2002). No Place for Particles in Relativistic Quantum Mechanics. Philosophy of Science, 69, 1-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/338939
Hartmann, S. (2001). Effective Field Theories, Reductionism and Scientific Explanation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 32B, 267-304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1355-2198(01)00005-3
Healey, R. A. (1989). The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics: An Interactive Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511624902
Hertz, H. (1962). Electric Waves. New York: Dover Reprint (Original, 1892).
Honner, J. (1987). The Description of Nature: Niels Bohr and the Philosophy of Quantum Physics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Howard, D. (2004). Who Invented the “Copenhagen Interpretation”: A Study in Mythology (pp. 669-682). East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.
Hughes, R. I. G. (1989). The Structure and Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kane, G. (2000). Supersymmetry. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing.
Kaplan, D. (2005). Five Lectures on Effective Field Theory. arXiv:nucl-th/0510023v1
Kim, J. (1963). Philosophy of Mind. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Kochen, S. (1985). A New Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (pp. 1-2). Teaneck, NJ: World Scientific Publishing Co.
Lévi-Strauss, C. (1963). Totemism, Translated by Rodney Needham. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
London, F., & Bauer, E. (1939). The Theory of Observation in Quantum Mechanics. In Wheeler and Zurek (pp. 217-259). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Mackey, J. (1963). The Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. New York: Benjamin.
MacKinnon, E. (1982). Scientific Explanation and Atomic Physics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
MacKinnon, E. (2007). Schwinger and the Ontology of Quantum Field Theory. Foundations of Science, 12, 295-323. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10699-007-9109-4
MacKinnon, E. (2008). The Standard Model as a Philosophical Challenge. Philosophy of Science, 75, 447-457.
MacKinnon, E. (2009). The Consistent Histories Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. PhilSciArchives # 4549.
MacKinnon, E. (2011). Interpreting Physics: Language and the Classical/Quantum Divide. Amsterdam: Springer.
Malinowski, B. (1953 [1921]). Argonauts of the Western Pacific. New York: E P. Dutton.
Manohar, A. (1996). Effective Field Theories. arXiv:hep/9606
Maxwell, J. C. (1954). A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism. New York: Dover Reprint.
Mehra, J., & Rechenberg, H. (1982). The Quantum Theory of Planck, Einstein, Bohr, and Sommerfeld Its Foundation and the Rise of Its Difficulties, 1900-1925. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Petruccioli, S. (1993). Atoms, Metaphors and Paradoxes: Niels Bohr and the Construction of a New Physics. I. McGilvray, Trans. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Quine, W. V. O. (1960). Word & Object. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Robinson, D. (1994). Can Superselection Rules Solve the Measurement Problem? British Journal for Philosophy of Science, 45, 79-93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjps/45.1.79
Ruetsche, L. (2002). Interpreting Quantum Field Theory. Philosophy of Science, 69, 348-378. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/341047
Ruetsche, L. (2011). Interpreting Quantum Theories. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Scheibe, E. (1973). The Logical Analysis of Quantum Mechanics. D. B. Sykes, Trans. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Schwinger, J. (1983). Renormalization Theory of Quantum Electrodynamics. In L. Brown, & L. Hoddeson, (Eds.), The Birth of Particle Physics (pp. 329-353). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Segal, C. (1986). Interpreting Greek Tragedy: Myth, Poetry, Text. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Seibt, J. (2002). Quanta, Tropes, or Processes: Ontologies for QFT beyond the Myth of Substance. In M. Kuhlmann, H. Lyre, & A. Wayne (Eds.), Ontological Aspects of Quantum Field Theory (pp. 53-97). Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/9789812776440_0003
Sellars, W. (1963). Philosophy and the Scientific Image of Man. In W. Sellars (Ed.), Science Perception and Reality (pp. 1-40). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Simon, P. (2002). Candidate General Ontologies for Situating Quantum Field Theory. In M. Kuhlmann, H. Lyre, & A. Wayne (Eds.), Ontological Aspects of Quantum Field Theory (pp. 33-52). Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/9789812776440_0002
Tegmark, M. (2014). Our Mathematical Universe: My Quest for the Ultimate Nature of Reality. New York: Knopf.
Teller, P. (1995). An Interpretive Introduction to Quantum Field Theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Van Fraassen, B. (1991). Quantum Mechanics: An Empiricist View. Oxford: Clarendon Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/0198239807.001.0001
Van Fraassen, B. (1999). The Manifest Image and the Scientific Image. In D. Aerts (Ed.), Einstein Meets Magritte: The White Book—An Interdisciplinary Reflection (pp. 29-52). Dordrecht: Kluwer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4704-0_3
Van Fraassen, B. (2002). The Empirical Stance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Weinberg, S. (1995). The Quantum Theory of Fields. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139644167
Wheeler, J. (1983). Law without Law. In J. Wheeler, & W. Zurek (Eds.), Quantum Theory and Measurement (pp. 182-216). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9781400854554
Wigner, E. P. (1967). Symmetries and Reflections: Scientific Essays. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Wilczek, F. (2008). The Lightness of Being: Mass, Ether, and the Unification of Forces. New York: Basic Books.