The complementarity principle states that. The principle of complementarity, its manifestations and essence
ADDITIONAL PRINCIPLE- one of the most important methodological and heuristic principles of modern science. Suggested N.Borom (1927) when interpreting quantum mechanics: for a complete description of quantum mechanical objects, two mutually exclusive (“additional”) classes of concepts are needed, each of which is applicable in special conditions, and their combination is necessary to reproduce the integrity of these objects. The physical meaning of the principle of complementarity lies in the fact that quantum theory is associated with the recognition of the fundamental limitations of classical physical concepts in relation to atomic and subatomic phenomena. However, as Bohr pointed out, "the interpretation of empirical material essentially rests precisely on the application of classical concepts" ( Bohr N. Fav. scientific works, vol. 2. M., 1970, p. thirty). This means that the action of the quantum postulate extends to the processes of observation (measurement) of objects of the microworld: “observation of atomic phenomena includes such an interaction of the latter with means of observation that cannot be neglected” (ibid., p. 37), i.e., on the one hand , this interaction leads to the impossibility of an unambiguous (“classical”) determination of the state of the observed system, regardless of the means of observation, and on the other hand, no other observation that excludes the influence of means of observation is possible in relation to the objects of the microworld. In this sense, the principle of complementarity is closely related to the physical meaning of W. Heisenberg's "uncertainty relation": if the momentum and energy values of a micro-object are certain, its spatio-temporal coordinates cannot be uniquely determined, and vice versa; therefore, a complete description of a micro-object requires the joint (additional) use of its kinematic (spatio-temporal) and dynamic (energy-momentum) characteristics, which, however, should not be understood as a combination in a single picture like similar descriptions in classical physics. An additional method of description is sometimes called the non-classical use of classical concepts (I.S. Alekseev).
The principle of complementarity is applicable to the problem of "particle-wave dualism", which arises when comparing explanations of quantum phenomena based on the ideas of wave mechanics (E. Schrödinger) and matrix mechanics (W. Heisenberg). The first type of explanation, using the apparatus of differential equations, is analytic; he emphasizes the continuity of the movements of micro-objects, described as generalizations of the classical laws of physics. The second type is based on the algebraic approach, for which the emphasis is on the discreteness of micro-objects, understood as particles, despite the impossibility of describing them in "classical" spatio-temporal terms. According to the principle of complementarity, continuity and discreteness are accepted as equally adequate characteristics of the reality of the microworld, they are not reducible to some "third" physical characteristic that would "link" them in a contradictory unity; the coexistence of these characteristics fits the formula “either one or the other”, and the choice of them depends on the theoretical or experimental problems that arise before the researcher (J. Holton).
Bohr believed that the principle of complementarity is applicable not only in physics, but has a wider methodological significance. The situation related to the interpretation of quantum mechanics "has a far-reaching analogy with the general difficulties in the formation of human concepts arising from the separation of subject and object" (ibid., p. 53). Bohr saw such analogies in psychology and, in particular, relied on the ideas of W. James about the specifics of introspective observation of the continuous course of thinking: such an observation affects the observed process, changing it; therefore, to describe mental phenomena established by introspection, mutually exclusive classes of concepts are required, which corresponds to the situation of describing objects of microphysics. Another analogy that Bohr pointed out in biology is related to the complementarity between the physicochemical nature of life processes and their functional aspects, between deterministic and teleological approaches. He also drew attention to the applicability of the principle of complementarity to understanding the interaction of cultures and social structures. At the same time, Bohr warned against absolutizing the principle of complementarity as a kind of metaphysical dogma.
Dead-ends can be considered such interpretations of the principle of complementarity, when it is interpreted as an epistemological "image" of some kind of "intrinsic" inconsistency of the objects of the microworld, displayed in paradoxical descriptions ("dialectical contradictions") such as "a micro-object is both a wave and a particle", "an electron has and does not have wave properties”, etc. The development of the methodological content of the complementarity principle is one of the most promising areas in the philosophy and methodology of science. Within its framework, the application of the principle of complementarity in studies of the relationship between normative and descriptive models of the development of science, between moral norms and moral self-determination of human subjectivity, between “criteria” and “critical-reflexive” models of scientific rationality is considered.
Literature:
1. Heisenberg V. Physics and Philosophy. M., 1963;
2. Kuznetsov B.G. The principle of complementarity. M., 1968;
3. Methodological principles of physics. History and modernity. M., 1975;
4. Holton J. Thematic analysis of science. M., 1981;
5. Alekseev I.S. The activity concept of cognition and reality. – Fav. works on methodology and history of physics. M., 1995;
6. Historical Types of Scientific Rationality, vols. 1–2. M., 1997.
ADDITIONAL PRINCIPLE
The principle that Bohr called complementarity is one of the most profound philosophical and natural scientific ideas of our time, with which only such ideas as the principle of relativity or the concept of a physical field can be compared. Its generality does not allow it to be reduced to any one statement - it must be mastered gradually, using concrete examples. The easiest way (as Bohr did in his time) is to start with an analysis of the process of measuring the momentum p and the coordinate x of an atomic object.
Niels Bohr noticed a very simple thing: the coordinate and momentum of an atomic particle cannot be measured not only simultaneously, but in general with the help of the same instrument. In fact, in order to measure the momentum p of an atomic particle and not change it very much, an extremely light mobile "instrument" is needed. But precisely because of his mobility, his position is very uncertain. To measure the x-coordinate, we must therefore take another - a very massive "device" that would not move when a particle hit it. But no matter how her momentum changes in this case, we will not even notice it.
When we speak into a microphone, the sound waves of our voice are converted there into membrane vibrations. The lighter and more mobile the membrane, the more accurately it follows the vibrations of the air. But the more difficult it is to determine its position at each moment of time. This simplest experimental setup is an illustration of the Heisenberg uncertainty relation: it is impossible to determine both characteristics of an atomic object - the coordinate x and the momentum p - in the same experiment. Two measurements and two fundamentally different devices are required, the properties of which are complementary to each other.
Additionality- this is the word and the turn of thought that became available to everyone thanks to Bohr. Before him, everyone was convinced that the incompatibility of two types of devices inevitably entails the inconsistency of their properties. Bohr denied such straightforwardness of judgments and explained: yes, their properties are indeed incompatible, but for a complete description of an atomic object, both of them are equally necessary and therefore do not contradict, but complement each other.
This simple argument about the complementarity of the properties of two incompatible devices explains well the meaning of the principle of complementarity, but by no means exhausts it. In fact, we need instruments not by themselves, but only to measure the properties of atomic objects. The x-coordinate and momentum p are those concepts, which correspond to two properties measured with two instruments. In the familiar chain of knowledge
phenomenon -> image -> concept -> formula
the principle of complementarity affects, first of all, the system of concepts of quantum mechanics and the logic of its conclusions.
The fact is that among the strict provisions of formal logic there is the “rule of the excluded middle”, which says: of two opposite statements, one is true, the other is false, and there cannot be a third. In classical physics, there was no occasion to doubt this rule, since there the concepts of "wave" and "particle" are really opposite and incompatible in essence. It turned out, however, that in atomic physics both of them are equally well applicable to describe the properties of the same objects, and for complete descriptions must be used simultaneously.
People brought up on the traditions of classical physics perceived these requirements as a kind of violation of common sense and even talked about the violation of the laws of logic in atomic physics. Bohr explained that the point here was not at all in the laws of logic, but in the carelessness with which, sometimes, without any reservations, classical concepts are used to explain atomic phenomena. But such reservations are necessary, and the Heisenberg uncertainty relation δx δp ≥ 1/2h is an exact representation of this requirement in a strict language of formulas.
The reason for the incompatibility of additional concepts in our minds is deep, but understandable. The fact is that we cannot know the atomic object directly - with the help of our five senses. Instead, we use precise and sophisticated instruments that have been invented relatively recently. To explain the results of experiments, we need words and concepts, but they appeared long before quantum mechanics and are in no way adapted to it. However, we are forced to use them - we have no other choice: we learn the language and all the basic concepts with mother's milk and, in any case, long before we learn about the existence of physics.
Bohr's principle of complementarity is a successful attempt to reconcile the shortcomings of an established system of concepts with the progress of our knowledge of the world. This principle expanded the possibilities of our thinking, explaining that in atomic physics not only concepts change, but also the very formulation of questions about the essence of physical phenomena.
But the significance of the principle of complementarity goes far beyond quantum mechanics, where it originally arose. Only later - when trying to extend it to other areas of science - did its true meaning for the entire system become clear. human knowledge. One can argue about the legitimacy of such a step, but one cannot deny its fruitfulness in all cases, even those far from physics.
Bohr himself liked to give an example from biology, connected with the life of the cell, the role of which is quite similar to the importance of the atom in physics. If an atom is the last representative of a substance that still retains its properties, then a cell is the smallest part of any organism that still represents life in its complexity and uniqueness. To study the life of a cell means to know all the elementary processes that take place in it, and at the same time to understand how their interaction leads to a completely special state of matter - to life.
When trying to execute this program, it turns out that the simultaneous combination of such analysis and synthesis is not feasible. In fact, in order to penetrate into the details of the mechanisms of a cell, we examine it through a microscope - first an ordinary one, then an electronic one - we heat the cell, pass an electric current through it, irradiate it, decompose it into its component parts ... But the more closely we begin to study the life of the cell, the more we will interfere in its functions and in the course of natural processes occurring in it. In the end, we will destroy it and therefore we will not learn anything about it as a whole living organism.
And yet the answer to the question "What is life?" requires analysis and synthesis at the same time. These processes are incompatible, but not contradictory, but only complementary - in the sense of Bohr. And the need to take them into account simultaneously is only one of the reasons why there is still no complete answer to the question of the essence of life.
As in a living organism, the integrity of its properties "wave - particle" is important in the atom. Final divisibility matter gave rise not only to the finite divisibility of atomic phenomena- she also gave the X limit of divisibility concepts with which we describe these phenomena.
It is often said that the right question is half the answer. These are not just nice words.
A correctly posed question is a question about the properties of a phenomenon that it really has. Therefore, such a question already contains all the concepts that must be used in the answer. An ideally posed question can be answered briefly: “yes” or “no”. Bohr showed that the question "Wave or particle?" when applied to an atomic object, it is incorrectly set. Such separate The atom has no properties, and therefore the question does not allow a clear answer "yes" or "no". In the same way as there is no answer to the question: “Which is larger: a meter or a kilogram?”, And any other questions of this type.
Two additional properties of atomic reality cannot be separated without destroying the completeness and unity of the natural phenomenon that we call the atom. In mythology, such cases are well known: it is impossible to cut a centaur into two parts, while keeping both the horse and the man alive.
An atomic object is neither a particle nor a wave, and even neither at the same time. An atomic object is something third, which is not equal to the simple sum of the properties of the wave and the particle. This atomic "something" is beyond our five senses, and yet it is certainly real. We do not have images and senses to fully imagine the properties of this reality. However, the strength of our intellect, based on experience, allows us to know it without it. In the end (it must be admitted that Born was right), "... now the atomic physicist has gone far from the idyllic ideas of the old-fashioned naturalist who hoped to penetrate the secrets of nature, lying in wait for butterflies in the meadow."
When Heisenberg discarded the idealization of classical physics - the concept of "a state of a physical system independent of observation" - he thereby anticipated one of the consequences of the complementarity principle, since the concepts of "state" and "observation" are complementary in the sense of Bohr. Taken separately, they are incomplete and therefore can only be determined jointly, through each other. Strictly speaking, these concepts do not exist separately at all: we always observe not something at all, but certainly something condition. And vice versa: every "state" is a thing in itself until we find a way to "observe" it.
The concepts taken separately: wave, particle, state of the system, observation of the system are some abstractions that have nothing to do with the atomic world, but are necessary for its understanding. Simple, classical pictures are complementary in the sense that a harmonious fusion of these two extremes is necessary for a complete description of nature, but within the framework of the usual logic, they can coexist without contradictions only if the scope of their applicability is mutually limited.
After thinking a lot about these and other similar problems, Bohr came to the conclusion that this is not an exception, but a general rule: any truly deep phenomenon of nature cannot be defined unambiguously with the help of the words of our language and requires at least two mutually exclusive additional concepts for its definition. This means that, provided that our language and habitual logic are preserved, thinking in the form of complementarity puts limits on the exact formulation of concepts that correspond to truly deep phenomena of nature. Such definitions are either unambiguous, but then incomplete, or complete, but then ambiguous, since they include additional concepts that are incompatible within the framework of ordinary logic. Such concepts include the concepts of "life", "atomic object", "physical system" and even the very concept of "knowledge of nature".
It has long been known that science is only one way to study the world. Another, additional, method is embodied in art. The very coexistence of art and science is a good illustration of the complementarity principle. One can completely go into science or live entirely by art - both of these approaches to life are equally legitimate, although taken separately and incomplete. The core of science is logic and experience. The basis of art is intuition and insight. But the art of ballet requires mathematical precision, and "... inspiration in geometry is as necessary as in poetry" They do not contradict, but complement each other: true science is akin to art - just like real art always includes elements Sciences. In their highest manifestations, they are indistinguishable and inseparable, like the "wave-particle" properties in the atom. They reflect different, additional aspects of human experience and only taken together give us a complete picture of the world. Unfortunately, only the "uncertainty relation" for the conjugated pair of concepts "science - art" is unknown, and therefore the degree of damage that we suffer with a one-sided perception of life.
Of course, the above analogy, like any analogy, is neither complete nor strict. It only helps us to feel the unity and inconsistency of the entire system of human knowledge.
The complementarity principle formulated. N. Borom in 1927, is one of the most profound philosophical and natural science ideas of our time. Only such ideas as the principle of relativity or the idea of a physical field can be compared with this idea.
An impetus to create. The boron of his complementarity principle turned out to be the results. Heisenberg - his famous "uncertainty relation" Bohr drew attention to the fact that the coordinate and momentum of a part of the Inca cannot be measured not only simultaneously, but also with the help of one device. These measurements must be performed using instruments that vary significantly; the incompatibility of these devices is naturally motivated by the inconsistency of the properties investigated with their help. These properties are indeed incompatible, but still necessary for a complete description of the object complementarity - so defined. Bor. These properties are
Indeed, we study the flow of light from two positions. First, with the help of various special methods, the spectral characteristics of light are investigated - which are the wavelengths of the radiation, but, the other. UGE - its energy characteristics, since the distribution of energy in the spectrum is determined. In the first case, the wave properties of light are studied, and in the second, corpuscular ones, since the energy is transferred into photons. These characteristics are studied using fundamentally different instruments, they are complementary, since wave and corpuscular indicators of the same degree are necessary for a complete description of such a phenomenon as light light.
Translated into the language of abstract concepts, the above reasoning can be generalized in the following way. A quantum object is a "thing in itself" until we have determined how to observe it. Various properties required to use various ways sometimes incompatible with each other. In fact, an "experimental situation" arises, the actors of which are the interrelated "object" and "observations"; without each other they are meaningless. The result of the implementation of the experimental situation (phenomenon) reflects the influence of the device on the object under study. By choosing different instruments, we change the experimental situation and study different phenomena. And although additional phenomena cannot be studied simultaneously, in one experiment, they are equally necessary for a complete description of the objects of study of jenny.
Corpuscular-wave dualism causes quite natural resistance in an inexperienced person - the concept of "particle" and "wave" is difficult for us to unite in consciousness. This reason for the incompatibility in our minds of additional new concepts, however, can be explained. To explain the results of the study of the microcosm, we are forced to resort to visual images that arose in pre-scientific times, and these images are not entirely suitable for our purposes. Among the main provisions of formal logic is the "rule of the excluded middle": of two opposite statements, one is true, the other is false, and the third cannot be. In classical physics, there was no case that would have cast doubt on this rule, since the concepts of "particle" and "wave" are indeed opposite and incompatible. But it turned out that in quantum physics they are equally well applicable for describing the property of the properties of the same objects, and they must be used simultaneously. Bohr explained that one cannot unconditionally apply classical concepts to describe quantum phenomena. In quantum physics, not only concepts change, but also the formulation of questions about the essence of physical phenomena. Pauli even suggested calling quantum mechanics the "complementarity theory" by analogy with Einsteininstein's theory of relativity.
An ideally posed question can be answered briefly: "yes" or "no" Bohr proved that the question "wave or particle" in relation to an atomic object was posed incorrectly, an atom does not have such separate properties, and therefore this question cannot be answered unambiguously" yes" or "no" A quantum object is neither a particle nor a wave, and neither at the same time. A quantum object is something third equal to the sum of the properties of a wave and a particle, just as a mermaid is not the sum of a woman and a fish. We do not have sense organs and images to imagine the properties of this atomic reality. Two additional properties of a quantum object cannot be separated without destroying the completeness and unity of natural nature.
Heisenberg rejected the idealization of classical physics - the notion of a "state of a physical system independent of observation." By this he predicted one of the consequences of the principle of complementarity, since "state" and "video surveillance" are complementary concepts. Taken separately, they are incomplete, and therefore can only be determined jointly, one through the other. More strictly, they do not exist separately at all: we always observe not something at all, but certainly some kind of state. On the contrary: every state is a thing in itself until we find a way to observe it.
The concepts of "wave" and "particle", "state" and "observations" are idealizations necessary for understanding the quantum world. Classical pictures are not complementary in the sense that their harmonious combination is necessary for a complete description of the essence of quantum phenomena. However, within the limits of customary logic, they can exist independently if the areas of their applicability are mutually exclusive.
These and other similar examples are shown. Bohr, are separate manifestations of the general rule * any truly deep phenomenon of nature cannot be defined unambiguously using the words of our language, it requires at least two mutually exclusive additional concepts for its definition. This means that, provided that our language and habitual logic are preserved, thinking in the form of complementarity sets limits for the precise formulation of concepts that correspond to truly profound natural phenomena. Such definitions are either unambiguous, but incomplete, or complete, but then ambiguous, since they include additional concepts that are incompatible within the limits of natural logic. Among such concepts are the concept of "life", "quantum object", "physical system" and even the very concept of "Knowledge of nature".
Bohr continued the enormous and strenuous work, investigating the application of the concept of complementarity in fields of knowledge other than physics. He considered this task no less important than purely physical research.
whether biological regularities are reduced to physical and chemical processes? and vision - the definition of physiology as "the physical chemistry of nitrogen-containing colloids" But such a view reflects only one side of the matter. The other side, more important, is the laws of living matter, although they are determined by the laws of physics and chemistry, but are not reduced to them. Biological processes are characterized by finalistic regularity, which answers the question "why?" "and" how?
A correct understanding of biology is possible only on the basis of the complementarity of physicochemical causality and biological purposefulness. The concept of complementarity makes it possible to describe living processes on the basis of complementary approaches.
In the article "Light and Life", Bohr notes that "the continuous exchange of substances between the organism and environment is necessary to maintain life, as a result of which a clear isolation of the organism as a physicochemical system seems impossible. Therefore, it can be considered that any attempt to draw a sharp line that allows an exhaustive physical and chemical analysis to be carried out will cause such changes in metabolism that are incompatible with the life of the organism ... ".
Indeed, when trying to study the details of the mechanism of the cell's vital activity, we subject it to various, sometimes harmful influences - heating, transmission electric current, research in an electron microscope, etc., as a result, we will destroy the cell and therefore we will not learn anything about it as an integral living organism. However, the answer to the question "What is life?" compatible, but not contradictory, but complementary, and the need to take them into account simultaneously is only one of the reasons why there is still no answer to the question of the essence of life.
Bohr thought a lot about the application of the concept of complementarity in psychology. He said: "We all know the old saying that when we try to analyze our experiences, we stop feeling them. In this sense of the word, we find that between psychological experiences, for the description of which it is advisable to use the words" thoughts "and" feelings " , there is a complementarity relation similar to that which exists between data on the behavior of atoms.
The physical picture of the phenomenon and its mathematical description are complementary. The creation of a physical picture requires neglect of details and does not lead to mathematical precision. Conversely, attempting to accurately describe the ad by searching mathematically makes it difficult to understand.
Science is only one of the ways of studying the surrounding world, another, additional way, embodied in art. The coexistence of art and science is one of the illustrations of the complementarity principle. The core of science is logic and experience; the basis of art is intuition and insight. They do not contradict, but complement each other: real science is like art - just like real art always contains elements of science. In their highest manifestations, they are indistinguishable and inseparable, like the "wave-particle" properties in the atom. They reflect various additional aspects of human experience and only taken together give us a complete picture of the world. We just do not know, unfortunately, the "uncertainty ratio" for the conjugated pair of concepts "science-art", and therefore the degree of unprofitability with a one-sided perception of life.
This analogy, like any analogy, is both incomplete and non-strict. It only helps to feel the unity and inconsistency of the entire system of human knowledge.
To the question "What is complementary to the concept of truth?"
Conformity principle
A new theory that claims to have a deeper knowledge of the essence of the universe, a more complete description and a wider application of its results than the previous one, should include the previous one as a limiting case. Thus, classical mechanics is the limiting case of quantum mechanics and the mechanics of the theory of relativity. Relativistic mechanics (special relativity) in the limit of small speeds passes into classical mechanics (Newtonian). This is the content of the methodological principle of correspondence formulated by N. Bohr in 1923.
The essence of the correspondence principle is as follows: any new more general theory, which is the development of previous classical theories, the validity of which was experimentally established for certain groups of phenomena, does not reject these classical theories, but includes them. The previous theories retain their significance for certain groups of phenomena as the limiting form and special case of the new theory. The latter determines the boundaries of the application of previous theories, and in certain cases there is the possibility of a transition from a new theory to an old one.
In quantum mechanics, the correspondence principle reveals the fact that quantum effects are significant only when considering quantities comparable to Planck's constant (h). When considering macroscopic objects, Planck's constant can be considered negligible (hà0). This leads to the fact that the quantum properties of the objects under consideration turn out to be insignificant; representations of classical physics - are fair. Therefore, the value of the correspondence principle goes beyond the boundaries of quantum mechanics. It will become an integral part of any new theory.
The principle of complementarity is one of the most profound ideas of modern natural science. A quantum object is not a wave, and not a particle separately. Experimental study of micro-objects involves the use of two types of instruments: one allows you to study the wave properties, the other - corpuscular. These properties are incompatible in terms of their simultaneous manifestation. However, they equally characterize the quantum object, and therefore do not contradict, but complement each other.
The principle of complementarity was formulated by N. Bohr in 1927, when it turned out that during the experimental study of micro-objects, accurate data can be obtained either about their energies and momenta (energy-impulse pattern), or about their behavior in space and time (spatio-temporal pattern). ). These mutually exclusive pictures cannot be applied simultaneously. Thus, if one organizes the search for a particle with the help of precise physical devices fixing its position, then the particle is found with equal probability at any point in space. However, these properties equally characterize the micro-object, which implies their use in the sense that instead of one single picture, two must be used: energy-impulse and space-time.
In a broad philosophical sense, the complementarity principle of N. Bohr is manifested in characterization of different objects of research within the same science.
The fundamental principle of quantum mechanics, along with the uncertainty relation, is the principle of complementarity, to which N. Bohr gave the following formulation:
"The concepts of particle and wave complement each other and at the same time contradict each other, they are complementary pictures of what is happening."
Contradictions of corpuscular-wave properties of micro-objects are the result of uncontrolled interaction of micro-objects and macro-devices. There are two classes of devices: in some quantum objects behave like waves, in others they behave like particles. In experiments, we observe not reality as such, but only a quantum phenomenon, including the result of the interaction of a device with a microobject. M. Born figuratively noted that waves and particles are "projections" of physical reality onto the experimental situation.
Firstly, the idea of wave-particle duality means that any material object that has wave-particle duality has an energy shell. A similar energy shell exists in the Earth, as well as in humans, which is most often called an energy cocoon. This energy shell can play the role of a sensory shell that shields a material object from the external environment and makes up its outer "gravitational sphere". This sphere can play the role of a membrane in the cells of living organisms. It passes inside only "filtered" signals, with the level of perturbations exceeding a certain limit value. Similar signals that have exceeded a certain threshold of sensitivity of the shell, it can also pass in the opposite direction.
Secondly, the presence of an energy shell in material objects brings to a new level of understanding the hypothesis of the French physicist L. de Broglie about the truly universal nature of wave-particle duality.
Thirdly, due to the evolution of the structure of matter, the nature of the corpuscular-wave dualism of an electron can be a reflection of the corpuscular-wave dualism of photons. This means that the photon, being a neutral particle, has a meson structure and is the most elementary micro atom from which, in the image and likeness, all material objects of the Universe are built. Moreover, this construction is carried out according to the same rules.
Fourthly, corpuscular-wave dualism makes it possible to naturally explain the phenomenon of gene memory (Gene memory) of particles, atoms, molecules, living organisms, making it possible to understand the mechanisms of such memory, when a structureless particle remembers all its creations in the Past and has "intelligence" to selected synthesis processes, in order to form new "particles", with selected properties.
The uncertainty principle is a physical law that states that it is impossible to accurately measure the coordinates and momentum of a microscopic object at the same time, because the measurement process disturbs the equilibrium of the system. The product of these two uncertainties is always greater than Planck's Constant. This principle was first formulated by Werner Heisenberg.
It follows from the uncertainty principle that the more precisely one of the quantities included in the inequality is determined, the less certain is the value of the other. No experiment can lead to a simultaneous accurate measurement of such dynamic variables; At the same time, the uncertainty in measurements is connected not with the imperfection of the experimental technique, but with the objective properties of matter.
The uncertainty principle, discovered in 1927 by the German physicist W. Heisenberg, was an important step in elucidating the patterns of intra-atomic phenomena and building quantum mechanics. An essential feature of microscopic objects is their corpuscular-wave nature. The state of a particle is completely determined by the wave function (a value that completely describes the state of a micro-object (electron, proton, atom, molecule) and, in general, of any quantum system). A particle can be found at any point in space where the wave function is non-zero. Therefore, the results of experiments to determine, for example, coordinates are of a probabilistic nature.
Example: the motion of an electron is the propagation of its own wave. If you shoot an electron beam through a narrow hole in the wall: a narrow beam will pass through it. But if you make this hole even smaller, such that its diameter is equal in size to the wavelength of an electron, then the electron beam will diverge in all directions. And this is not a deflection caused by the nearest atoms of the wall, which can be eliminated: this is due to the wave nature of the electron. Try to predict what will happen next with an electron passing through the wall, and you will be powerless. You know exactly where it crosses the wall, but you can't tell how much transverse momentum it will acquire. On the contrary, in order to accurately determine that an electron will appear with such and such a certain momentum in original direction, you need to enlarge the hole so that the electron wave passes straight, only weakly diverging in all directions due to diffraction. But then it is impossible to say exactly where exactly the electron-particle passed through the wall: the hole is wide. How much you win in the accuracy of determining the momentum, so you lose in the accuracy with which its position is known.
This is the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. He played an extremely important role in the construction of a mathematical apparatus for describing the waves of particles in atoms. Its strict interpretation in experiments with electrons is that, like light waves, electrons resist any attempt to make measurements with the utmost precision. This principle also changes the picture of the Bohr atom. It is possible to determine exactly the momentum of an electron (and, therefore, its energy level) in any of its orbits, but at the same time its location will be absolutely unknown: nothing can be said about where it is. From this it is clear that it makes no sense to draw a clear orbit of an electron and mark it on it in the form of a circle. At the end of the XIX century. many scientists believed that the development of physics was completed for the following reasons:
More than 200 years there are laws of mechanics, the theory of universal gravitation
developed a molecular kinetic theory
A solid foundation has been laid for thermodynamics
Completed Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism
Fundamental laws of conservation (energy, momentum, angular momentum, mass and electric charge) have been discovered
At the end of XIX - beginning of XX century. discovered by V. Roentgen - X-rays (X-rays), A. Becquerel - the phenomenon of radioactivity, J. Thomson - electron. However, classical physics failed to explain these phenomena.
A. Einstein's theory of relativity required a radical revision of the concept of space and time. Special experiments confirmed the validity of J. Maxwell's hypothesis about the electromagnetic nature of light. It could be assumed that the radiation of electromagnetic waves by heated bodies is due to the oscillatory motion of electrons. But this assumption had to be confirmed by comparing theoretical and experimental data.
For a theoretical consideration of the laws of radiation, we used the model of an absolutely black body, i.e., a body that completely absorbs electromagnetic waves of any length and, accordingly, emits all wavelengths of electromagnetic waves.
An example of an absolutely black body in terms of emissivity can be the Sun, in terms of absorption - a cavity with mirror walls with a small hole.
The Austrian physicists I. Stefan and L. Boltzmann experimentally established that the total energy E radiated for 1 with an absolutely black body from a unit surface is proportional to the fourth power of the absolute temperature T:
where s = 5.67.10-8 J/(m2.K-s) is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant.
This law was called the Stefan-Boltzmann law. He made it possible to calculate the radiation energy of a completely black body from a known temperature.
In an effort to overcome the difficulties of the classical theory in explaining the radiation of a black body, M. Planck in 1900 put forward a hypothesis: atoms emit electromagnetic energy in separate portions - quanta. Energy E, where h=6.63.10-34 J.s is Planck's constant.
It is sometimes convenient to measure the energy and Planck's constant in electron volts.
Then h=4.136.10-15 eV.s. In atomic physics, the quantity is also used
(1 eV is the energy that an elementary charge acquires, passing through an accelerating potential difference of 1 V. 1 eV = 1.6.10-19 J).
Thus, M. Planck indicated a way out of the difficulties that the theory of thermal radiation encountered, after which the modern physical theory, called quantum physics, began to develop.
Physics is the main of the natural sciences, since it reveals truths about the relationship of several basic variables that are true for the entire universe. Her versatility is inversely proportional to the number of variables she introduces into her formulas.
The progress of physics (and science in general) is associated with the gradual rejection of direct visibility. As if such a conclusion should contradict the fact that modern science and physics, first of all, is based on experiment, i.e. empirical experience that takes place under human controlled conditions and can be reproduced at any time, any number of times. But the thing is that some aspects of reality are invisible to superficial observation and visibility can be misleading.
Quantum mechanics is a physical theory that establishes the way of description and the laws of motion at the micro level.
Classical mechanics is characterized by the description of particles by specifying their position and velocities, and the dependence of these quantities on time. In quantum mechanics, the same particles under the same conditions can behave differently.
Statistical laws can only be applied to large populations, not to individuals. Quantum mechanics refuses to search for individual laws of elementary particles and establishes statistical laws. On the basis of quantum mechanics, it is impossible to describe the position and speed of an elementary particle or predict its future path. Probability waves tell us the probability of encountering an electron in a particular place.
The importance of experiment has grown in quantum mechanics to such an extent that, as Heisenberg writes, "observation plays a decisive role in an atomic event and that reality differs depending on whether we observe it or not."
The fundamental difference between quantum mechanics and classical mechanics is that its predictions are always probabilistic. This means that we cannot accurately predict exactly where, for example, an electron falls in the experiment discussed above, no matter what perfect means of observation and measurement are used. One can only estimate his chances of getting to a certain place, and, therefore, apply for this the concepts and methods of probability theory, which serves to analyze uncertain situations.
In quantum mechanics, any state of a system is described using the so-called density matrix, but, unlike classical mechanics, this matrix determines the parameters of its future state not reliably, but only with varying degrees of probability. The most important philosophical conclusion from quantum mechanics is the fundamental uncertainty of measurement results and, consequently, the impossibility of accurately predicting the future.
This, combined with the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and other theoretical and experimental evidence, has led some scientists to suggest that microparticles have no inherent properties at all and only appear at the moment of measurement. Others suggested that the role of the experimenter's consciousness for the existence of the entire Universe is key, since, according to quantum theory, it is observation that creates or partially creates the observed. Determinism is the doctrine of the initial determinability of all processes occurring in the world, including all processes of human life, on the part of God (theological determinism, or the doctrine of predestination), or only the phenomena of nature (cosmological determinism), or specifically the human will (anthropological-ethical determinism), for the freedom of which, as well as for responsibility, there would then be no room left.
Definability here means the philosophical assertion that every event that occurs, including both human actions and behavior, is uniquely determined by a set of causes that immediately precede this event.
In this light, determinism can also be defined as the thesis that there is only one, precisely given, possible future.
Indeterminism is a philosophical doctrine and methodological position that deny either the objectivity of a causal relationship or the cognitive value of a causal explanation in science.
In the history of philosophy, starting from ancient Greek philosophy (Socrates) up to the present, indeterminism and determinism act as opposing concepts on the problems of the conditionality of a person’s will, his choice, the problem of a person’s responsibility for his actions.
Indeterminism treats the will as an autonomous force, arguing that the principles of causality do not apply to the explanation of human choice and behavior.
The term determination was introduced by the Hellenistic philosopher Democritus in his atomistic concept, which denied chance, taking it simply for an unknown necessity. From the Latin language, the term determination is translated as a definition, the obligatory definability of all things and phenomena in the world by other things and phenomena. At first, to determine meant to determine an object through the identification and fixation of its features that separate this object from others. Causality was equated with necessity, while randomness was excluded from consideration, it was considered simply non-existent. Such an understanding of determination implied the existence of a cognizing subject.
With the emergence of Christianity, determinism is expressed in two new concepts - divine predestination and divine grace, and the old principle of free will collides with this new, Christian determinism. For the general ecclesiastical consciousness of Christianity, from the very beginning it was equally important to keep intact both assertions: that everything, without exception, depends on God and that nothing depends on man. In the 5th century, in the West, in his teachings, Pelagius raises the issue of Christian determinism in the aspect of free will. Blessed Augustine spoke out against Pelagian individualism. In his polemical writings, in the name of the demands of Christian universality, he often carried determinism to erroneous extremes, incompatible with moral freedom. Augustine develops the idea that the salvation of a person depends entirely and exclusively on the grace of God, which is communicated and acts not according to a person’s own merits, but as a gift, according to the free choice and predestination on the part of the Divine.
Determinism was further developed and substantiated in the natural sciences and materialistic philosophy of modern times (F. Bacon, Galileo, Descartes, Newton, Lomonosov, Laplace, Spinoza, French materialists of the 18th century). In accordance with the level of development of natural science, the determinism of this period is mechanistic, abstract.
Based on the works of his predecessors and on the fundamental ideas of the natural sciences of I. Newton and C. Linnaeus, Laplace, in his work “The Experience of the Philosophy of the Theory of Probability” (1814), brought the ideas of mechanistic determinism to its logical conclusion: he proceeds from the postulate, according to which, from knowledge of the initial causes can always be unambiguously deduced consequences.
The methodological principle of determinism is at the same time the fundamental principle philosophy about being. One of the fundamental ontological ideas laid down in the basis of classical natural science by its creators (G. Galileo, I. Newton, I. Kepler, and others) was the concept of determinism. This concept consisted in the adoption of three basic statements:
1) nature functions and develops in accordance with its inherent internal, "natural" laws;
2) the laws of nature are an expression of the necessary (unambiguous) connections between the phenomena and processes of the objective world;
3) the purpose of science, corresponding to its purpose and capabilities, is the discovery, formulation and justification of the laws of nature.
Among the diverse forms of determination, reflecting the universal interconnection and interaction of phenomena in the surrounding world, the cause-and-effect, or causal (from Latin causa - cause) connection is especially distinguished, the knowledge of which is indispensable for correct orientation in practical and scientific activity. Therefore, it is the cause that is the most important element of the system of determining factors. And yet the principle of determinism is wider than the principle of causality: in addition to cause-and-effect relationships, it includes other types of determination (functional connections, connection of states, target determination, etc.).
determinism in its historical development passed through two main stages - classical (mechanistic) and post-classical (dialectical) in its essence.
Epicurus's teaching on the spontaneous deviation of an atom from a straight line contained a modern understanding of determinism, but since Epicurus's randomness itself is not determined by anything (uncaused), then without any special errors we can say that indeterminism originates from Epicurus.
Indeterminism is the doctrine that there are states and events for which a cause does not exist or cannot be specified.
In the history of philosophy, two types of indeterminism are known:
· The so-called "objective" indeterminism, which completely denies causality as such, not only its objective reality, but also the possibility of its subjectivist interpretation.
· Idealistic indeterminism, which, denying the objective nature of the relations of determination, declares causality, necessity, regularity as products of subjectivity, and not attributes of the world itself.
This means (in Hume, Kant and many other philosophers) that cause and effect, like other categories of determination, are only a priori, i.e. received not from practice, forms of our thinking. Many subjective idealists declare the use of these categories to be a "psychological habit" of a person to observe one phenomenon after another and declare the first phenomenon to be the cause and the second to be the effect.
The stimulus for the revival of indeterministic views at the beginning of the 20th century was the fact that the role of statistical regularities in physics increased, the presence of which was declared to refute causality. However, the dialectical-materialistic interpretation of the correlation of chance and necessity, the categories of causality and law, the development of quantum mechanics, which revealed new types of objective causal connection of phenomena in the microworld, showed the failure of attempts to use the presence of probabilistic processes in the foundation of the microworld to deny determinism.
Historically, the concept of determinism is associated with the name of P. Laplace, although already among his predecessors, for example, Democritus and Spinoza, there was a tendency to identify the "law of nature", "causality" with "necessity", considering "chance" as a subjective result of ignorance of "true" causes .
Classical physics (particularly Newtonian mechanics) developed a specific idea of a scientific law. It was taken as obvious that for any scientific law the following requirement must necessarily be satisfied: if the initial state of a physical system (for example, its coordinates and momentum in Newtonian mechanics) and the interaction that determines the dynamics are known, then, in accordance with a scientific law, its state can and should be calculated at any point in time, both in the future and in the past.
The causal relationship of phenomena is expressed in the fact that one phenomenon (cause) under certain conditions necessarily brings to life another phenomenon (consequence). Accordingly, it is possible to give working definitions of cause and effect. A cause is a phenomenon whose action brings to life, determines the subsequent development of another phenomenon. Then the effect is the result of the action of a certain cause.
In the determination of phenomena, in the system of their certainty, along with the cause, conditions also enter - those factors, without the presence of which the cause cannot give rise to an effect. This means that the cause itself does not work in all conditions, but only in certain ones.
The system of determining phenomena (especially social ones) often includes a reason - one or another factor that determines only the moment, the time of the occurrence of the effect.
There are three types of temporal orientation of causal relationships:
1) determination by the past. Such a determination is essentially universal, because it reflects an objective pattern, according to which the cause in the end always precedes the effect. This regularity was very subtly noticed by Leibniz, who gave the following definition of a cause: "A cause is that which causes some thing to begin to exist";
2) determination by the present. Knowing nature, society, our own thinking, we invariably discover that many things, being determined by the past, are also in a determining interaction with things that coexist simultaneously with them. It is no coincidence that we encounter the idea of a simultaneous determining relationship in various fields of knowledge - physics, chemistry (when analyzing equilibrium processes), biology (when considering homeostasis), etc.
The determinism of the present is also directly related to those paired categories of dialectics, between which there is a causal relationship. As you know, the form of any phenomenon is under the determining influence of the content, but this does not mean at all that the content precedes the form in general and at its original point can be formless;
3) determination by the future. Such a determination, as emphasized in a number of studies, although it occupies a more limited place among the determining factors compared to the types considered above, at the same time plays a significant role. In addition, one must take into account the entire relativity of the term "determination by the future": future events are still absent, one can speak of their reality only in the sense that they are necessarily present as trends in the present (and were present in the past). And yet the role of this type of determination is very significant. Let us turn to two examples related to the plots that have already been discussed,
Determination by the future underlies the explanation of the discovery discovered by Academician P.K. Anokhin of advanced reflection of reality by living organisms. The meaning of such an advance, as emphasized in the chapter on consciousness, is in the ability of a living thing to respond not only to objects that now directly affect it, but also to changes that seem to be indifferent to it in this moment, but in reality are signals of likely future impacts. The reason here, as it were, operates from the future.
There are no unreasonable phenomena. But this does not mean that all connections between phenomena in the surrounding world are causal.
Philosophical determinism, as the doctrine of the material regular conditioning of phenomena, does not exclude the existence of non-causal types of conditioning. Non-causal relationships between phenomena can be defined as such relationships in which there is a relationship, interdependence, interdependence between them, but there is no direct relationship between genetic productivity and temporal asymmetry.
The most characteristic example of non-causal conditioning or determination is the functional relationship between individual properties or characteristics of an object.
The connections between causes and effects can be not only necessary, rigidly determined, but also random, probabilistic. The knowledge of probabilistic causal relationships required the inclusion of new dialectical categories in the causal analysis: chance and necessity, possibility and reality, regularity, etc.
Randomness is a concept that is polar to necessity. Random is such a relationship of cause and effect, in which the causal grounds allow the implementation of any of the many possible alternative consequences. At the same time, which particular variant of communication will be realized depends on a combination of circumstances, on conditions that are not amenable to accurate accounting and analysis. Thus, a random event occurs as a result of the action of some of an indefinitely large number of diverse and exactly unknown causes. The onset of a random event-consequence is in principle possible, but not predetermined: it may or may not occur.
In the history of philosophy, the point of view is widely represented, according to which there is no real accident, it is a consequence of necessary causes unknown to the observer. But, as Hegel first showed, a random event in principle cannot be caused by internal laws alone, which are necessary for this or that process. A random event, as Hegel wrote, cannot be explained from itself.
The unpredictability of chances seems to contradict the principle of causality. But this is not so, because random events and causal relationships are the consequences, although not known in advance and thoroughly, but still really existing and fairly certain conditions and causes. They do not arise randomly and not from “nothing”: the possibility of their appearance, although not rigidly, not unambiguously, but naturally, is connected with causal grounds. These connections and laws are discovered as a result of studying a large number (flow) of homogeneous random events, described using the apparatus of mathematical statistics, and therefore are called statistical. Statistical patterns are objective in nature, but differ significantly from the patterns of single phenomena. The use of quantitative methods of analysis and calculation of characteristics, subject to the statistical laws of random phenomena and processes, made them the subject of a special section of mathematics - the theory of probability.
Probability is a measure of the possibility of a random event occurring. The probability of an impossible event is zero, the probability of a necessary (reliable) event is one.
The probabilistic-statistical interpretation of complex causal relationships has made it possible to develop and apply in scientific research fundamentally new and very effective methods knowledge of the structure and laws of development of the world. Modern advances in quantum mechanics and chemistry, genetics would be impossible without understanding the ambiguity of relationships between the causes and effects of the studied phenomena, without recognizing that the subsequent states of a developing object can not always be completely deduced from the previous one.
