Skip Navigation

The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 2008 59(3):499-548; doi:10.1093/bjps/axn027
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Muller, F. A.
Right arrow Articles by Saunders, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author (2008). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Society for the Philosophy of Science. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Discerning Fermions

F. A. Muller and Simon Saunders

Faculty of Philosophy Erasmus University Rotterdam Burg. Oudlaan 50, 3062 PA The Netherlands
Department of Physics & Astronomy Utrecht University Budapestlaan 6, IGG–3.08, 3584 CD The Netherlands
Faculty of Philosophy Oxford University 10 Merton Street Oxford, OX1 4JJ United Kingdom

f.a.muller{at}fwb.eur.nl f.a.muller{at}phys.uu.nl simon.saunders{at}philosophy.ox.ac.uk


  Abstract

We demonstrate that the quantum-mechanical description of composite physical systems of an arbitrary number of similar fermions in all their admissible states, mixed or pure, for all finite-dimensional Hilbert spaces, is not in conflict with Leibniz's Principle of the Identity of Indiscernibles (PII). We discern the fermions by means of physically meaningful, permutation-invariant categorical relations, i.e. relations independent of the quantum-mechanical probabilities. If, indeed, probabilistic relations are permitted as well, we argue that similar bosons can also be discerned in all their admissible states; but their categorical discernibility turns out to be a state-dependent matter. In all demonstrated cases of discernibility, the fermions and the bosons are discerned (i) with only minimal assumptions on the interpretation of quantum mechanics; (ii) without appealing to metaphysical notions, such as Scotusian haecceitas, Lockean substrata, Postian transcendental individuality or Adamsian primitive thisness; and (iii) without revising the general framework of classical elementary predicate logic and standard set theory, thus without revising standard mathematics. This confutes: (a) the currently dominant view that, provided (i) and (ii), the quantum-mechanical description of such composite physical systems always conflicts with PII; and (b) that if PII can be saved at all, the only way to do it is by adopting one or other of the thick metaphysical notions mentioned above. Among the most general and influential arguments for the currently dominant view are those due to Schrödinger, Margenau, Cortes, Dalla Chiara, Di Francia, Redhead, French, Teller, Butterfield, Giuntini, Mittelstaedt, Castellani, Krause and Huggett. We review them succinctly and critically as well as related arguments by van Fraassen and Massimi.

  1. Introduction: The Currently Dominant View
    1.1 Weyl on Leibniz's principle
    1.2 Intermezzo: Terminology and Leibnizian principles
    1.3 The rise of the currently dominant view
    1.4 Overview

  2. Elements of Quantum Mechanics
    2.1 Physical states and physical magnitudes
    2.2 Composite physical systems of similar particles
    2.3 Fermions and bosons
    2.4 Physical properties
    2.5 Varieties of quantum mechanics

  3. Analysis of Arguments
    3.1 Analysis of the Standard Argument
    3.2 Van Fraassen's analysis
    3.3 Massimi's analysis

  4. The Logic of Identity and Discernibility
    4.1 The language of quantum mechanics
    4.2 Identity of physical systems
    4.3 Indiscernibility of physical systems
    4.4 Some kinds of discernibility

  5. Discerning Elementary Particles
    5.1 Preamble
    5.2 Fermions
    5.3 Bosons

  6. Concluding Discussion


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.