Affiliation:
1. Department Applied Mathematics and Physics, University of Applied Sciences Technikum Wien, 1200 Vienna, Austria
Abstract
We explore the different notions of completeness applied in the EPR discussion following and amending the thorough analysis of Arthur Fine. To this aim, we propose a classification scheme for scientific theories that provides a methodology for analyzing the different levels at which interpretive approaches come into play. This allows us to contrast several concepts of completeness that operate on specific levels of the theory. We introduce the notion of theory completeness and compare it with the established notions of Born completeness, Schrödinger completeness and bijective completeness. We relate these notions to the recent concept of ψ-completeness and predictable completeness. The paper shows that the EPR argument contains conflicting versions of completeness. The confusion of these notions led to misunderstandings in the EPR debate and hindered its progress. Their clarification will thus contribute to recent debates on interpretational issues of quantum mechanics. Finally, we discuss the connection between the EPR paper and the Einstein–Rosen paper with regard to the question of completeness.
Subject
General Physics and Astronomy
Reference26 articles.
1. Jammer, M. (1974). The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics, Wiley.
2. Esfeld, M. (2012). Philosophie der Physik, Suhrkamp.
3. When champions meet: Rethinking the Bohr–Einstein debate;Landsman;Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. Part B Stud. Hist. Philos. Mod. Phys.,2006
4. Über die Aufgabe der Physik;Carnap;Kant-Studien,1923
5. Physics and reality;Einstein;J. Frankl. Inst.,1936