Classical Determinism vs Quantum Indeterminism Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Davies & Gribbin (1992: 214-5):

In the early days of the quantum theory these strange results divided physicists into two camps. There were those, led by Niels Bohr, who fully accepted the implications of the theory, and insisted that the microworld is inherently indeterministic. And there were those, most notably Einstein, who maintained that quantum mechanics could not be regarded as a satisfactory theory if it made such nonsensical claims. As we have mentioned, Einstein hoped that behind the weird quantum world lay a hidden reality of concrete objects and forces moving in accordance with the more traditional notions of cause and effect. 

Einstein supposed that the fuzziness of quantum systems is somehow a result of observational inadequacy. Our instruments are simply not elaborate enough, he believed, to reveal the intricate details of the variables that determine the seemingly erratic behaviour of subatomic particles. 

Bohr's view was that there are no causes of this chaos, that the old Newtonian view of a clockwork Universe unfolding according to a predetermined pattern is forever discredited. Rather than rigid rules of cause and effect, claimed Bohr, matter is subject to the laws of chance. The processes of nature are not so much a game of pool as a game of roulette.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the indeterminism of the quantum physics of Bohr concerns the relation between potential and instance, whereas the determinism of the classical physics of Newton and Einstein concerns relations between instances.