17,133 research outputs found
Categoricity, Open-Ended Schemas and Peano Arithmetic
One of the philosophical uses of Dedekind’s categoricity theorem for Peano Arithmetic is to provide support for semantic realism. To this end, the logical framework in which the proof of the theorem is conducted becomes highly significant. I examine different proposals regarding these logical frameworks and focus on the philosophical benefits of adopting open-ended schemas in contrast to second order logic as the logical medium of the proof. I investigate Pederson and Rossberg’s critique of the ontological advantages of open-ended arithmetic when it comes to establishing the categoricity of Peano Arithmetic and show that the critique is highly problematic. I argue that Pederson and Rossberg’s ontological criterion deliver the bizarre result that certain first order subsystems of Peano Arithmetic have a second order ontology. As a consequence, the application of the ontological criterion proposed by Pederson and Rossberg assigns a certain type of ontology to a theory, and a different, richer, ontology to one of its subtheories
The Ontological Import of Adding Proper Classes
In this article, we analyse the ontological import of adding classes to set theories. We assume that this increment is well represented by going from ZF system to NBG. We thus consider the standard techniques of reducing one system to the other. Novak proved that from a model of ZF we can build a model of NBG (and vice versa), while Shoenfield have shown that from a proof in NBG of a set-sentence we can generate a proof in ZF of the same formula. We argue that the first makes use of a too strong metatheory. Although meaningful, this symmetrical reduction does not equate the ontological content of the theories. The strong metatheory levels the two theories. Moreover, we will modernize Shoenfields proof, emphasizing its relation to Herbrands theorem and that it can only be seen as a partial type of reduction. In contrast with symmetrical reductions, we believe that asymmetrical relations are powerful tools for comparing ontological content. In virtue of this, we prove that there is no interpretation of NBG in ZF, while NBG trivially interprets ZF. This challenges the standard view that the two systems have the same ontological content
Nonlocal quantum information transfer without superluminal signalling and communication
It is a frequent assumption that - via superluminal information transfers -
superluminal signals capable of enabling communication are necessarily
exchanged in any quantum theory that posits hidden superluminal influences.
However, does the presence of hidden superluminal influences automatically
imply superluminal signalling and communication? The non-signalling theorem
mediates the apparent conflict between quantum mechanics and the theory of
special relativity. However, as a 'no-go' theorem there exist two opposing
interpretations of the non-signalling constraint: foundational and operational.
Concerning Bell's theorem, we argue that Bell employed both interpretations at
different times. Bell finally pursued an explicitly operational position on
non-signalling which is often associated with ontological quantum theory, e.g.,
de Broglie-Bohm theory. This position we refer to as "effective
non-signalling". By contrast, associated with orthodox quantum mechanics is the
foundational position referred to here as "axiomatic non-signalling". In search
of a decisive communication-theoretic criterion for differentiating between
"axiomatic" and "effective" non-signalling, we employ the operational framework
offered by Shannon's mathematical theory of communication. We find that an
effective non-signalling theorem represents two sub-theorems, which we call (1)
non-transfer-control (NTC) theorem, and (2) non-signification-control (NSC)
theorem. Employing NTC and NSC theorems, we report that effective, instead of
axiomatic, non-signalling is entirely sufficient for prohibiting nonlocal
communication. An effective non-signalling theorem allows for nonlocal quantum
information transfer yet - at the same time - effectively denies superluminal
signalling and communication.Comment: 21 pages, 5 figures; The article is published with open acces in
Foundations of Physics (2016
An argument for psi-ontology in terms of protective measurements
The ontological model framework provides a rigorous approach to address the
question of whether the quantum state is ontic or epistemic. When considering
only conventional projective measurements, auxiliary assumptions are always
needed to prove the reality of the quantum state in the framework. For example,
the Pusey-Barrett-Rudolph theorem is based on an additional preparation
independence assumption. In this paper, we give a new proof of psi-ontology in
terms of protective measurements in the ontological model framework. The proof
does not rely on auxiliary assumptions, and also applies to deterministic
theories such as the de Broglie-Bohm theory. In addition, we give a simpler
argument for psi-ontology beyond the framework, which is only based on
protective measurements and a weaker criterion of reality. The argument may be
also appealing for those people who favor an anti-realist view of quantum
mechanics.Comment: 13 pages, no figures. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern
Physics, Available online 17 August 201
- …