Resolving the Quantum Paradox…
Beyond Bohr : Rethinking the Copenhagen Interpretation – The Mediation of Meaning from Being in the World to Generalisations and Universal Abstractions of the Human Mind
Note: A central question arises from this observation by Freeman Dyson — Is Quantum Mechanics solely about Physics and horizontal causality (i.e. Modern Science and Abstraction (i.e. Bringing to the Mind ) ) or is Quantum Mechanics grounded in Semiotics and how Conscious Beings derive meaning from Being in the World? Is the idea of Quantum Mechanics Physical, Metaphysical or both (entangled)? Is Human Consciousness Metaxic Semiotic and mediates the Metaphysical & Physical through Human Being participating in Reality?
Quantum Mechanics — Copenhagen Interpretation: A Modern Scientific Interpretation
“What we observe is not nature itself but nature exposed to our method of questioning. Our scientific work in physics consists in asking questions about nature in the language that we possess and trying to get an answer from experiment by the means that are at our disposal”…
— Werner Heisenberg
A Modern Scientific Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics can be understood through the Copenhagen Interpretation.
The Copenhagen interpretation is a synthesis of a collection of perspectives on the meaning of quantum mechanics.
It emphasises a quantum system is described by wavefunctions which encapsulates all the potential outcomes (or states) a system might exhibit.
These potentialities are not inherent classical properties but rather exist as a collection of possibilities (superposition — a combination of simultaneous states) that only acquire definitive values upon measurement.
A well known illustration is Schrödinger’s Cat Thought Experiment and the question — Is the cat in the box alive or dead or both at the same time? — which highlights the quantum superposition (a quantum paradox — quantum indeterminacy).
It is only when we observe its state (measurement performed) that a quantum system is forced to assume a definite outcome, and that’s the state and characteristics that we observe (i.e. collapse of the wave function) — noting decoherence theory suggests that environmental interactions can also break this superposition.
The process of measurement is fundamentally irreversible meaning that once an outcome is observed, the system cannot return to its prior superposition.
Measurement also introduces epistemic limitations in that we cannot ascribe definite pre-existing values to unobserved properties of a system since it may be forced into different observable states each time.
This explains why a quantum system’s behavior is shaped by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle that sets a fundamental limit on the precision with which complementary properties (e.g. position and momentum) can be measured.
Furthermore, Bohr’s principle of complementarity states that quantum objects exhibit different behaviors (wave-like or particle-like) depending on the experimental setup, and not all properties can be simultaneously defined.
Quantum mechanics is intrinsically probabilistic, governed by the Born rule, which calculates outcome probabilities.
The interpretation also rejects counterfactual definiteness, meaning that properties do not have definite values before measurement.
Although the Copenhagen interpretation denies objective reality in the classical sense, it provides a robust, mathematically objective framework for predicting experimental results.
While quantum descriptions do not attribute inherent reality to unmeasured properties, they remain objective in that they are independent of subjective personal beliefs and grounded in the formalism of quantum mechanics itself.
Quantum Mechanics : Re-interpreting the Copenhagen Interpretation – The Mediation of Meaning from Being in the World to Generalisations and Universal Abstractions of the Human Mind
Given that Metaphysics is the Study of Being — Science of Reality — Can the Modern Scientific understanding of Quantum Mechanics (i.e. the Copenhagen Interpretation) be reframed through the prism of Peircian Semiotics interpretation of Human Consciousness combining Classical Metaphysics (Aristotle), Phenomonology (Heidegger, Husserl,Jakob von Uexküll, Heinz von Foerster) and Semiotics (Peirce).
The Peircian semiotic triadic interpretation (Peirce) is a synthesis of a collection of perspectives understood through the Metaxic Semiotic nature of Human Consciousness and our entangled Being in the World (Heidegger) . It also reflects an intentional consciousness (Husserl) where the Conscious Self is not closed but where consciousness is fundamentally relational and interactional (always engaged with the World and the objects therein ).
One that highlights the entangled nature of Human Consciousness and the central role of consciousness in observing & interpreting meaning through Being in the World and participating in Reality.
The role of consciousness’s mediation of meaning to the Human Mind through signs that reflects the Metaxic Semiotic and permeable nature of consciousness — in-between the physical & metaphysical realms and the continuum of Reality and a finite natural being’s manifestation through the Mind.
The Primary Category of Being are “substance” (Aristotle) or “objects” (Peirce) that are relational in nature (i.e. Relationship of Meaning — Peirce and Intentional Consciousness — Husserl) in their being in the world (Heidegger) in contrast with classical independent discrete structure of substances (Aristotle) or objects (Peirce) (i.e. meaning derived solely from the Object itself). It’s relationships encapsulate all possible (Aristotle) meanings (Peirce) of a substance(Aristotle) or an object (Peirce) that it might exhibit in Being in the World(Heidegger).
These potentialities (Second Categories of Being (accidental categories — Aristotle) are not inherent classical properties but rather exist as a collection of possibilities in Being (superposition — a combination of simultaneous states of meaning — possibilities (Aristotle) of different meaning (Peirce) ) that only acquire definitive meaning upon observation and interpretation by an Observer (Peirce) (i.e. when the relation of this Being (Dasein) to Being (Sein) results in the emergence of Meaning).
A well-known illustration is Schrödinger’s Cat Thought Experiment and the question — Is the cat in the box alive or dead or both at the same time? — which highlights the semiotic (Peirce) superposition (a semiotic (Peirce) paradox — indeterminacy of meaning (Peirce) of the cat (object — Peirce)).
It is only when we observe the object (Peirce) (interpretation performed) that a semiotic (Peirce) object (Peirce) is forced to assume a definite meaning (Peirce), and that’s the meaning (Peirce) and characteristics that we observe (Peirce) (i.e. collapse of the wave function) — noting decoherence theory suggests that environmental context (i.e. Peirce — relationships of meaning in Being in the World (Heidegger) ) can also break this superposition.
The process of interpretation (Peirce) is fundamentally irreversible meaning that once meaning (Peirce) is derived from the observation (Peirce), the object (Peirce) cannot return to its prior superposition. (Note — an irreversibility when the relation of this Being (Dasein) to Being (Sein) results in the emergence of Meaning)
Observation & Interpretation (Peirce) also introduces semiotic limitations (Peirce) in that we cannot ascribe definite pre-existing meaning (Peirce) to unobserved properties of an object (Peirce) since it may be forced into different observable contexts (Peirce) each time.
This explains why a semiotic object’s meaning (Peirce) is shaped by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle ( i.e. Peirce — reflects the Fallibility of Human Beliefs) that sets a fundamental limit on the precision with which Meaning (Peirce) can be derived (also refer to other Boundary constraints to Meaning such as Kant’s a priori structures & categories of the mind and Peirce’s Pragmatic Maxim ).
Furthermore, Bohr’s principle of complementarity can be reframed so that semiotic objects exhibit different meanings (Peirce) depending on the Being in the World (Heidegger ) context (Peirce), and not all meaning (Peirce) can be simultaneously defined.
Semiotic Triadic (Pierce) is intrinsically subjective (Jakob von Uexküll — Umwelt) given that the interpretation of meaning is by the Observer (Peirce), governed by the Pragmatic Maxim (Peirce), which provides a normative rule for Meaning (Peirce).
The interpretation also rejects counterfactual definiteness, meaning that Objects (Peirce) do not have definite meaning (Peirce) before observation (Peirce).
Although the Peircian semiotic triadic interpretation (Peirce) denies objective reality in the classical sense (i.e. Objectivity without an Observer — Heinz von Foerster), it provides a robust, semiotic objective framework (Peirce — Semiotic Triadic and Pragmatic Maxim) for deriving meaning (Peirce — Pragmatic Maxim — meaning of a concept is its practical effect) .
While semiotic triadic meaning (Peirce) does not attribute meaning to unobserved objects (Peirce Semiotic Triadic and Heidegger — Being in the World), the semiotic process (Peirce) remains objective in that the ultimate meaning (Peirce) are independent of subjective (Jakob von Uexküll — Umwelt) personal beliefs and grounded in the formalism of the semiotic triadic (Peirce) and Metaphysical Geometric Unity itself.
Is resolving the Quantum Paradox Metaphysics or Physics or a combination of both?
Is the central question that emerges from the Quantum Paradox illuminated by eminent 20th — 21st Century British-American physicist and mathematician Freeman Dyson from the quote captured above a scientific question of “best explanation”?
The Primacy of Man and Primacy of Human Consciousness.
A Mental Structure perspective of the nature of Reality (apart from the World).
Or, alternatively, is the central question one of how we understand the nature of Reality?
An understanding of Reality through relationships of Being ( this Being (Dasein) to Being (Sein)) that results in the emergence of Meaning — noting Metaphysics is the Study of Being — the Science of Reality.
The Primacy of Human Consciousness entangled relationship to the Primacy of Existence.
A perspective anchored in Being (i.e. Human Being’s being in the World — Heidegger).
Is Quantum Mechanics and the Quantum Paradox about wave-like or particle-like substances (a materialism)?
Or is Quantum Mechanics and the Quantum Paradox really about the metaphysics of meaning?
Man’s Being in the World and Man’s participatory process in Reality.
Human consciousness is a participatory metaxic semiotic process that allows for:
- the interpretation of mind-independent reality via
- a mind-dependent representation, leading to learning, knowledge formation, habits and the actualisation of potential.
A distinction between:
A distinction between Peircian Semiotics (i.e. conscious participation in reality through meaning-making — a Triadic of the Observer & Observed mediated by Signs — Part of the World — Being in the World) and Bacon’s Scientific Method(i.e. epistemology & rationalism — cognitive processes of bringing to the mind — apart from the World — mind dependent representation of a mind independent reality) that provides the basis for Modern Science including Physics.
A distinction between Descarte’s Cartesianism and Kant’s Pure Reason that views Reality from the balcony of Abstraction (apart from the World) and Heidegger’s — Dasein — Being in the World (part of the World).
Resolving the Quantum Paradox Metaphysics
Could the Copenhagen Interpretation in physics be reframed through the prism of this distinction?
A Metaphysics of Meaning-making.
The distinction between being in the world (Dasein — Heidegger) and abstraction to the mind (Descartes & Kant).
The distinction between subjective lived experience (e.g. Umwelt) and objective inquiry (e.g. John Duns Scotus — Moderate Realism).
A distinctinction between Peircian Abductive Reason (semiotics — revealing new relationships of Meaning through the relationship of Human Being to Being) and Francis Bacon’s Inductive Reasoning (bringing to the mind by combining rationalism & empiricism — generalisation & abstraction — prediction & agency).
The Copenhagen Interpretation epistemic and anti-realist formulations (such as Bohr’s complementarity principle) can be understood through this distinction.
The distinction between a mind-dependent representation and mind-independent reality.
The distinction between bringing to the Mind (apart from the World) and being in the World (part of the world).
The distinction between reductionism and entanglement.
The distinction between abstraction and embodiment.
The distinction between ontology & epistemology and semiotics.
The distinction between Knowing and Being.
The distinction between Rosmini’s Ideal Being and Rosmini’s Real Being.
The distinction between Nietzschean Perspectivism and a Mind Independent Reality.
The distinction between a Constructivism view of Reality (e.g. Marxism — Primacy of Man which is now endemic across Western Civilisation) and Man’s participation in Reality.
The distinction between a Primacy of Human Consciousness and the Primacy of Existence.
The distinction between the Contingent Being of Man (Created) and the Necessary Being of God (Creator).
The wave function collapse and observer-dependent aspects of quantum mechanics — our scientific representations — are not only mind dependent representations (cognition) but are are also inextricably linked to a mind independent reality via human consciousness (mediation through semiotic signs).
Our concepts, categories and structures of conceptualisation such as measurement are Peircian Metaxic Semiotic (i.e. Semiotic Triadic and Pragmatic Maxim) in their foundations.
One that reflects the inherent nature of Human Consciousness and Being in the World. The entanglement between mind and world.
A Unity of Being and Order of Being.
The Crisis of Modernity and Post-Modernity — Mathematiisation of Nature — A Cartesian Mental Structure version of Reality
“The world that is being created by the accumulation of technical means is an artificial world and hence radically different from the natural world.It destroys, eliminates, or subordinates the natural world, and does not allow this world to restore itself or even to enter into a symbiotic relation with it. The two worlds obey different imperatives, different directives, and different laws which have nothing in common. Just as hydroelectric installations take waterfalls and lead them into conduits, so the technical milieu absorbs the natural. We are rapidly approaching the time when there will be no longer any natural environment at all. When we succeed in producing artificial aurorae boreales, night will disappear and perpetual day will reign over the planet”…
―Jacques Ellul,The Technological Society
From a Heideggerian perspective, science such as physics, abstracts from lived experiences to construct an idealised (idealism) framework that allows for human thoughts generalisation & understanding together with prediction & manipulation.
This is akin to what Heidegger called the “mathematisation of nature” — a mode of revealing (aletheia) that transforms being into an objectified, manipulable entity of things learnt (māthemata” (μαθηματα)).
Note: Cognition viewed as a mind-dependent representation of a mind independent reality. The process of organising, categorising, and abstracting experiences. Mind dependent representations of Meaning, Being & Knowing(Apart from the World).
A Cartesian Mental Structure version of Reality which is central to the Crisis of Post-Nietzschean Modernity and Post-Modernity.
The present Dark Age.
In contrast, being in the world is pre-conceptual and engaged; it does not primarily function through detached observation (i.e. a Cartesian Balcony of Abstraction) but through participation and meaning-making.
“We have to build our lives to reflect the patterns that exist in nature and not those configured by machines. The order we seek is reflected in creation. It is not machine-like. Meaning, as I have said before, precedes reason. Life unfolds not via staccato inputs from disembodied pieces of matter but out of a living unpredictable whole. An ant contains more wonder than all our technology”…
— About this Life
[ LINK ]
If we reframe the Copenhagen Interpretation through this lens, quantum mechanics reveals the limits of traditional scientific representation.
For example, the semiotic picture of the pipe is not the pipe.
Instead of science describing a fully mind-independent reality, it deals with an entangled process where the observer plays a constitutive role (i.e. Human Being’s participation in Reality).
“What we observe is not nature itself but nature exposed to our method of questioning. Our scientific work in physics consists in asking questions about nature in the language that we possess and trying to get an answer from experiment by the means that are at our disposal”…
— Werner Heisenberg
This is not to say that reality is purely subjective, but rather that our modes of access to it are necessarily shaped by the way we engage with it — suggesting a dynamic rather than a purely static or absolute understanding of reality.
“The a priori method is distinguished for its comfortable conclusions. It is the nature of the process to adopt whatever belief we are inclined to, and there are certain flatteries to the vanity of man which we all believe by nature until we are awakened from our pleasing dream by rough facts”…
— Charles Sanders Peirce
This reframing resonates with the broader shift in 20th-century thought from a Cartesianism, detached knower to an embodied participatory epistemology.
A Peircian world of signs that reflect the relationship between the Observer & Observed anchored in Being and the foundational role of Meaning (Metaxic Semiotic) for Natural and Divine Revelation.
“Objectivity is the delusion that observations could be made without an observer”…
— Heinz von Foerster
A Theory of the Adjacent Possible that also recognises a Divine Order — a Physical, Conscious and Moral Entanglement in Being in the World.
Resolving Schrödinger’s Cat and the Quantum Paradox
Schrödinger’s Cat and the Quantum Paradox can be resolved through understanding that Reality by its very nature is participatory.
If we take a semiotic and phenomenological approach, the act of observation can be seen as an act of bringing meaning into existence — collapsing potential states into an actualised experience of reality.
An Observer, Observed and Meaning mediated via Signs.
An intentional consciousness (Husserl).
The collapse of the wave function and the emergence of meaning through a participation in reality — conscious being & context mediated through signs.
It reflects a Universe full of meaning and questions that we can ask.
A World where the Primacy of Existence ultimately tests the veracity of the Truth Claims made by Man and the veracity of the concepts and categories we embrace (Peirce Pragmatic Maxim).
A World beyond the prevailing Nietzschean Perspectivism and Marxist Ideology.
As we progress through the 21st Century we have a choice:
- Do we remain on the Cartesianism Balcony of Abstraction (Apart from the World)?;
- Do we continue to gravitate towards so called Knowledge Work (a World of Abstraction, Algorithms & Computation) and ignore our embodiment in the World?
- Do we accept the notion that Intelligence can be artificial and anchored in abstraction (e.g. algorithms and computation)?
- Do we accept a Reality imposed by our fellow man through control and force (a Modern Sophism and New Totalitarianism anchored in Marxist Ideology)?
or alternatively
- Do we recognise that it is in Being in the World that new relationships of being ( this Being (Dasein) to Being (Sein)) result in the emergence of Meaning — noting Metaphysics is the Study of Being — the Science of Reality;
- that an independent reality exists beyond human thought;
- that our ideas have consequences through the actions we take and beliefs we embrace;
- that meaning emerges from consciousness and participating in Reality (Being in the World);
- that intelligence is not computational but anchored in the conscious mediation, interpretation, transformation and adaption of meaning; and
- that it is through epistemological humility, open inquiry and fallibilism that we learn. A World that reflects the Contingent Being of Man and the Necessary Being of God.
.
