arXiv subjects

Michele Caponigro

Publications and source records attributed to Michele Caponigro.

10 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2012

Epistemic vs Ontic Classification of quantum entangled states?

In this brief paper, starting from recent works, we analyze from conceptual point of view this basic question: can the nature of quantum entangled states be interpreted ontologically or epistemologically? According to some works, the degrees of freedom (and the tool of quantum partitions) of quantum systems permit us to establish a possible classification between factorizable and entangled states. We suggest, that the "choice" of degree of freedom (or quantum partitions), even if mathematically justified introduces an epistemic element, not only in the systems but also in their classification. We retain, instead, that there are not two classes of quantum states, entangled and factorizable, but only a single class of states: the entangled states. In fact, the factorizable states become entangled for a different choice of their degrees of freedom (i.e. they are entangled with respect to other observables). In the same way, there are no partitions of quantum systems which have an ontologically superior status with respect to any other. For all these reasons, both mathematical tools utilize(i.e quantum partitions or degrees of freedom) are responsible for creating an improper classification of quantum systems. Finally, we argue that we cannot speak about a classification of quantum systems: all quantum states exhibit a uniquely objective nature, they are all entangled states.

quant-ph↗

arXiv2008

Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics: a critical survey

This brief survey analyzes the epistemological implications about the role of observer in the interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. As we know, the goal of most interpretations of quantum mechanics is to avoid the apparent intrusion of the observer into the measurement process. In the same time, there are implicit and hidden assumptions about his role. In fact, most interpretations taking as ontic level one of these fundamental concepts as information, physical law and matter bring us to new problematical questions. We think, that no interpretation of the quantum theory can avoid this intrusion until we do not clarify the nature of observer.

physics.gen-ph↗

arXiv2007

Approach to Physical Reality: a note on Poincare Group and the philosophy of Nagarjuna

We argue about a possible scenario of physical reality based on the parallelism between Poincare group and the sunyata philosophy of Nagarjuna. The notion of "relational" is the common denominator of two views. We have approached the relational concept in third-person perspective (ontic level). It is possible to deduce different physical consequence and interpretation through first-person perspective approach. This relational interpretation leave open the questions: i)we must abandon the idea for a physical system the possibility to extract completeness information? ii)we must abandon the idea to infer a possible structure of physical reality?

physics.gen-ph↗

arXiv2007

"Continuum versus Discrete" Physics: brief note on Endo- and exo-observer of a physical system

We argue about the following concepts:(i)introduction of endo and exo-observer of a physical system (ii) possible relation between endo, exo-observer and continuum/discrete nature of the same system (iii)the distinction about two categories of observers do not help to solve the basic nature(continuum/discrete)of the system considered. We argue that discrete math tool utilized to describe behavior of a physical system is to ascribe to the exo-observer description. In other words, discreteness nature of a system is due at the presence of an external observer description, the observation act. Vice versa, we retain, that endo-observer description give us a continuum nature of the system but only in a Platonic realm. Finally, we retain that a real theory of the state of matter could to build a real independence from the observer. These brief considerations open a discussion on the foundations of discrete math tools and their relation with the observation act, included the possible extension to foundations of the quantum mechanics.

physics.gen-ph↗

arXiv2006

"Physical quantity" and " Physical reality" in Quantum Mechanics: an epistemological path

We reconsider briefly the relation between "physical quantity" and "physical reality in the light of recent interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. We argue, that these interpretations are conditioned from the epistemological relation between these two fundamental concepts. In detail, the choice as ontic level of the concept affect, the relative interpretation. We note, for instance, that the informational view of quantum mechanics (primacy of the subjectivity) is due mainly to the evidence of the "random" physical quantities as ontic element. We will analyze four positions: Einstein, Rovelli, d'Espagnat and Zeilinger.

quant-ph↗

arXiv2006

Quantum Formalism: Brief Epistemological Considerations

We argue about a conceptual approach to quantum formalism. Starting from philosophical conjectures (Platonism, Idealism and Realism) as basic ontic elements (namely: math world, data world, and state of matter), we will analyze the quantum superposition principle. This analysis bring us to demonstrate that the basic assumptions affect in different ways:(a) the general problem of the information and computability about a system, (b) the nature of the math tool utilized and (c) the correspondent physical reality.

quant-ph↗

arXiv2006

Physical Realities from Simple Philosophical Conjectures

We will focus on the Quantum theory and starting from simple philosophical conjectures, we infer possible different physical realities. Also we argue of possible wavefunction emerging under specific conditions of the physical reality. Finally, we affirm that the "hidden choice" of the ontic elements as primitive is a fundamental step to analyze the construction of any theory.

physics.gen-ph↗

arXiv2006

Questions and Physical Reality -Simple Philosophical considerations-

We argue, through some philosophical considerations, on (i)dependent or (ii) an independent existence of physical reality underlying quantum states. According these simple considerations, we conclude that is impossible to have a clear independent existence of physical reality, we need to search the reasons in the relationship between our questions (the observers) and the consequent answers (always estimated by the same observers). Finally, we infer that every theory is affected by our "questions", so we cannot speak about an unconditional and independent theory underlying physical reality. Plan of the paper. The existence of physical reality underlying quantum states: (i) it before bit,(ii)it without bit,(iii)it from bit.

quant-ph↗

arXiv2006

Quantum Mechanics: 44 Admissible Questions? -Not only Fapp-

The words: determinism, hidden variables, subjectivism, information, objectivism, informational-theoretic axioms,observers have some connection with physical reality? What we mean with "description" of physical reality? When we say that we understand this reality? Certain parameters:position, velocity are sufficient? We will focus only to conceptual considerations regarding the relation between the "questions" and the relative "answers" in general and specifically in quantum mechanics. It is usually believed that the answers are more important of the questions, for this reason we can read many answers everywhere and in different field of knowledge. We need to add and clarify some things: (i) usually an answers require a question, (ii) but, as we know, their relation is not so simple and immediate, (iii) For instance: a)an epistemic questions give us ontic answers? b)the answer has a connection with the question and vice versa? c)we could to infer a question starting from an answer? d)there are answers without questions? These answers could be in some framework considered as ontic answers? The relative scientific works are the same time ontic? Speaking of quantum mechanics we see around many answers in the meantime we do not see the correspondent questions, these answers seem completely independent, and this seem a right road, the road of the independent nature unlinked from human thoughts. We retain instead that questions can affect the possible answers. Exist "something" before the question?

quant-ph↗

arXiv2006

A probabilistic approach to quantum mechanics based on tomograms

It is usually believed that a picture of Quantum Mechanics in terms of true probabilities cannot be given due to the uncertainty relations. Here we discuss a tomographic approach to quantum states that leads to a probability representation of quantum states. This can be regarded as a classical-like formulation of quantum mechanics which avoids the counterintuitive concepts of wave function and density operator. The relevant concepts of quantum mechanics are then reconsidered and the epistemological implications of such approach discussed.

quant-ph↗