A Misrepresentation Of Heisenberg's Epistemology Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Carlo Ravelli, Seven Brief Lessons on Physics (2014: 15):

Heisenberg imagined that electrons do not always exist. They only exist when someone or something watches them, or better, when they are interacting with something else. They materialise in a place, with calculable probability, when colliding with something else. The 'quantum leaps' from one orbit to another are the only means they have of being 'real'; an electron is a set of jumps from one interaction to another. When nothing disturbs it, it is not in any precise place. It is not in a 'place' at all. ...

In quantum mechanics no object has a definite position, except when colliding headlong with something else. In order to describe it in mid-flight, between one interaction and another, we use an abstract mathematical formula which has no existence in real space, only in abstract mathematical space. ...

It is not possible to predict where an electron will reappear, but only to calculate the probability that it will pop up here or there. The question of probability goes to the heart of physics...

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, electrons only 'exist' when they are construed of experience as an instance of meaning by consciousness. It is not sufficient for some thing to detect them; some one must observe what some thing detected, as Heisenberg himself would maintain. Moreover, for Heisenberg, the interaction is between ourselves and Nature, as the following quotes make clear:

Natural science, does not simply describe and explain nature;
it is part of the interplay between nature and ourselves.

What we observe is not nature itself,
but nature exposed to our method of questioning.

The interaction of electrons with "something else" is the means of detecting them, as when a photon is bounced off an electron to identify the position of the electron.

The materialisation of an electron in a given place is the construal of experience by consciousness as an instance of meaning: the location of an electron. The "calculable probability" is the quantification of the electron as potential, whereas the measurement of the location of an electron is the quantification of an electron as instance.

To be clear, quantum leaps are not the only means of electrons being 'real' (construed as an instance of meaning) because not all electrons are trapped within atoms, as exemplified by the flow of electrons in electricity and beta radiation.

It is when there is no conscious construal of experience as meaning that there is no electron in no place.

In Quantum mechanics an object has a definite position whenever its position (meaning) is construed of experience by consciousness. To paraphrase Richard Feynman: to say what an object is doing when you are not looking at it is to produce an error.

The mathematical equation (wave function) quantifies the electron as potential.

Whereas "real" space is a construal of experience as meaning, abstract mathematical space is a reconstrual of meaning as meta-meaning (meaning of meaning).

The probability of where an electron will appear is a quantification of it as potential. Measurements of where it actually appears are quantifications of it as instance.