The Case Against Factorism: On the Labels of $$\otimes$$-Factor Hilbert-Spaces of Similar Particles in Quantum Mechanics

Müller, Frederik; Leegwater, Gijs

doi:10.1007/s10838-020-09514-6

Cited by 12 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar ideas have been endorsed in Dieks and Lubberdink (2011;, Saunders (2013; and Bigaj (2015b). Most recently, Leegwater and Muller (2020) have joined the ranks of those who believe that quantum particles of the same type can be at least momentarily discerned by their properties (in addition to that they offer a deep analysis of different variants of factorism, which broadly speaking is a view that the individuation of the components of a quantum system can be done by factorizing the global state space of the composite system). Perhaps the earliest record of the heterodox conception of how to individuate quantum particles is Andrea Lubberdink's unpublished Master's thesis (Lubberdink 1998).…”

Section: The Meaning Of Labels In Symmetric/antisymmetric Statesmentioning

confidence: 77%

How to Justify the Symmetrization Postulate in Quantum Mechanics

Bigaj

2020

J Gen Philos Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to reconstruct and correct one argument (known in the literature as the exchange degeneracy argument) in support of the symmetrization postulate in quantum mechanics. I identify the central premise of the argument as a thesis specifying a particular ontic (or epistemic) property of quantum superpositions. The precise form of this thesis depends on some underlying assumptions of a metaphysical character (concerning identifications of objects across possible worlds, or representations de re). I compare the exchange degeneracy argument with alternative formal arguments for the symmetrization postulate, and I discuss the role and meaning of labels in the symmetric/antisymmetric representations of the states of many particles.

show abstract

Section: The Meaning Of Labels In Symmetric/antisymmetric Statesmentioning

confidence: 77%

How to Justify the Symmetrization Postulate in Quantum Mechanics

Bigaj

2020

J Gen Philos Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They also show that these states cannot violate Bell's inequalities (see Ghirardi and Marinatto 2004: 3). However, in a kind of appendix of their recent paper, Muller and Leegwater (2020) argue that this conclusion is, at least, controversial. They consider a product state of the form…”

Section: -Reactions To the Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…. Muller and Leegwater (2020) call this kind of states, whose non-factorizability is the result of symmetrization or antisymmetrization, tangled. The question is, then, whether tangled states are entangled or not.…”

Section: Now Let Us Consider the Possible Statesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Entanglement and indistinguishability in a quantum ontology of properties

Fortín

Lombardi

2022

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the present article is to address the problem of entanglement in the case of indistinguishable particles from a perspective based on the algebraic formalism of quantum mechanics, which is the natural formal counterpart of an ontology of properties, devoid of the ontological category of individual. On the basis of this perspective, an algebraic definition of entanglement is adopted, which supplies a unified conception, valid for both the distinguishable and the indistinguishable cases. An additional advantage of this algebraic definition is that it does justice to the relativity of entanglement, a feature that cannot be ignored. 1.-IntroductionEntanglement in many-body systems of so-called "indistinguishable particles" has received a great attention during the last decades due to its applications in quantum information and condensed matter. These works have led to revise the very concept of entanglement in the case of indistinguishability, which poses a specific challenge: according to the traditional definition of entanglement in pure states as non-factorizability, symmetrized and anti-symmetrized states should be entangled (except in some cases involving bosons). But there are good reasons to think that this is not the case: not always non-factorizable states of composite bosonic or fermionic systems should be conceived as legitimate cases of entanglement. This problem has been addressed from different perspectives, such as modifying the general definition of entanglement, removing the "surplus structure" resulting from the need of symmetrize or anti-symmetrize states in the case of indistinguishability, or treating the entanglement of indistinguishable particles in a different manner than in distinguishable particles.Nevertheless, the common feature of those proposals -as well as of the discussions about the SA

show abstract

“…This standard doctrine-that factor space labels refer to single particles-has been baptized "factorism" by Caulton(Caulton 2014;Muller and Leegwater 2020). It constitutes the conceptual background of the "received view" concerning the nature of identical particles in quantum mechanics(French and Krause 2006).2 Note that we consider this state only for the sake of argument: As already mentioned, and as will be further explained in a moment, quantum mechanics does not allow the existence of product states for particles of the same kind.3 The labels 1 and 2 are not strictly necessary here and in similar expressions: the factor spaces could be identified by their order, from left to right, in the expressions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Identical Quantum Particles as Distinguishable Objects

Dieks

Lubberdink

2020

J Gen Philos Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to classical physics particles are basic building blocks of the world. These classical particles are distinguishable objects, individuated by unique combinations of physical properties. By contrast, in quantum mechanics the received view is that particles of the same kind ("identical particles") are physically indistinguishable from each other and lack identity. This doctrine rests on the quantum mechanical (anti)symmetrization postulates together with the "factorist" assumption that each single particle is represented in exactly one factor space of the tensor product Hilbert space of a many-particle system. Even though standard in theoretical physics and the philosophy of physics, the assumption of factorism and the ensuing indistinguishability of particles are problematic. Particle indistinguishability is irreconcilable with the everyday meaning of "particle", and also with how this term is used in the practice of physics. Moreover, it is a consequence of the standard view that identical quantum particles remain indistinguishable even in the classical limit, which makes a smooth transition to the classical particle concept impossible. Lubberdink (1998;2009) and Dieks and Lubberdink (2011) have proposed an alternative conception of quantum particles that does not rely on factorism and avoids these difficulties. We further explain and discuss this alternative framework here. One of its key consequences is that particles in quantum theory are not fundamental but emergent; another that once they have emerged, quantum particles are always physically distinguishable and thus possess a physically grounded identity.

show abstract

The Case Against Factorism: On the Labels of $$\otimes$$-Factor Hilbert-Spaces of Similar Particles in Quantum Mechanics

Cited by 12 publications

References 24 publications

How to Justify the Symmetrization Postulate in Quantum Mechanics

How to Justify the Symmetrization Postulate in Quantum Mechanics

Entanglement and indistinguishability in a quantum ontology of properties

Identical Quantum Particles as Distinguishable Objects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About