Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Structural Metaphysics of Quantum Theory and General Relativity

  • Article
  • Published:
Journal for General Philosophy of Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper compares ontic structural realism in quantum physics with ontic structural realism about space–time. We contend that both quantum theory and general relativity theory support a common, contentful metaphysics of ontic structural realism. After recalling the main claim of ontic structural realism and its physical support, we point out that both in the domain of quantum theory and in the domain of general relativity theory, there are objects whose essential ways of being are certain relations so that these objects do not possess an intrinsic identity. Nonetheless, the qualitative, physical nature of these relations is in the quantum case (entanglement) fundamentally different from the classical, metrical relations treated in general relativity theory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ainsworth, P. M. (2010). What is ontic structural realism? Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 41, 50–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bain, J. (2006). Spacetime structuralism. In D. Dieks (Ed.), Ontology of spacetime. Philosophy and foundations of physics series. Vol. 1, Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 37–65.

  • Bartels, A. (1996). Modern essentialism and the problem of individuation of spacetime points. Erkenntnis, 45, 25–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartels, A. (2010a). Dispositionen in Raumzeit-Theorien. In C. F. Gethmann (Ed.), Lebenswelt und Wissenschaft. XXI. Deutscher Kongress für Philosophie. Kolloquien. Hamburg: Meiner, pp. 352–362.

  • Bartels, A. (2010b). Dispositions, laws, and spacetime. Manuscript.

  • Bartels, A. (2011). Der ontologische Status der Raumzeit in der Allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie. In: M. Esfeld (Ed.), Philosophie der Physik. Berlin: Suhrkamp, pp. 32–49.

  • Bell, J. S. (1964). On the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen-paradox. Physics, 1, 195–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergmann, P. G., & Komar, A. (1960). Poisson brackets between locally defined observables in general relativity. Physical Review Letters, 4, 432–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohm, D. (1951). Quantum theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butterfield, J. N. (2006). Against pointillisme about geometry. In F. Stadler & M. Stöltzner (Eds.), Time and history. Proceedings of the 28th Ludwig Wittgenstein symposium. Frankfurt (Main): Ontos, pp. 181–222.

  • Cao, Tian. Yu. (2003). Can we dissolve physical entities into mathematical structure? Synthese, 136, 57–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clifton, R. K., & Halvorson, H. (2001). Entanglement and open systems in algebraic quantum field theory. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 32, 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorato, M. (2000). Substantivalism, relationism, and structural spacetime realism. Foundations of Physics, 30, 1605–1628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorato, M. (2008). Is structural spacetime realism relationism in disguise? The supererogatory nature of the substantivalism/relationism debate. In D. Dieks (Ed.), The ontology of spacetime II (pp. 17–37). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ehlers, J. (1973). Survey of general relativity theory. In W. Israel (Ed.), Relativity, astrophysics and cosmology (pp. 1–125). Dordrecht: Reidel.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Einstein, A. (1948). Quanten–Mechanik und Wirklichkeit. Dialectica, 2, 320–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esfeld, M. (2001). Holism in philosophy of mind and philosophy of physics. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Esfeld, M. (2004). Quantum entanglement and a metaphysics of relations. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 35, 601–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esfeld, M., & Lam, V. (2008). Moderate structural realism about space-time. Synthese, 160, 27–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esfeld, M., & Lam, V. (2011). Ontic structural realism as a metaphysics of objects. In: A. Bokulich & P. Bokulich (Eds.), Scientific structuralism. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 143–159.

  • Esfeld, M., & Sachse, C. (2010). Kausale Strukturen. Einheit und Vielfalt in der Natur und den Naturwissenschaften. Berlin: Suhrkamp. English version: Conservative reductionism New York: Routledge 2011.

  • French, S. (2010). The interdependence of structure, objects and dependence. Forthcoming in Synthese.

  • French, S., & Ladyman, J. (2003). Remodelling structural realism: Quantum physics and the metaphysics of structure. Synthese, 136, 31–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • French, S., & Ladyman, J. (2011). In defence of ontic structural realism. In: A. Bokulich & P. Bokulich (Eds.), Scientific structuralism. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 25–42.

  • French, S., & Redhead, Michael. L. G. (1988). Quantum physics and the identity of indiscernibles. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 39, 233–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghirardi, G. C., Rimini, A., & Weber, T. (1986). Unified dynamics for microscopic and macroscopic systems. Physical Review D, 34, 470–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haag, R. (1992). Local quantum physics. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Healey, R. A. (1991). Holism and nonseparability. Journal of Philosophy, 88, 393–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heil, J. (2003). From an ontological point of view. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hoefer, C. (2000). Energy conservation in GTR. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 31, 187–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, D. (1985). Einstein on locality and separability. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 16, 171–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarrett, J. P. (1984). On the physical significance of the locality conditions in the Bell arguments. Noûs, 18, 569–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladyman, J. (1998). What is structural realism? Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Science, 29, 409–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladyman, J. (2007). On the identity and diversity of objects in a structure. Proceedings of the aristotelian society. Supplementary Volume 81, 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladyman, J., & Bigaj, T. F. (2010). The principle of the identity of indiscernibles and quantum mechanics. Philosophy of Science, 77, 117–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladyman, J., Ross, D., Spurrett, D., & Collier, J. (2007). Every thing must go. Metaphysics naturalised. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lam, V. (2011a). The entanglement structure of quantum field systems. Manuscript.

  • Lam, V. (2011b). Gravitational and non-gravitational energy: The need for background structures. Philosophy of Science, 78, 1012–1024.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malament, D. B. (2006). Classical relativity theory. In J. N. Butterfield & J. Earman (Eds.), Handbook of the philosophy of science. Philosophy of physics. Part A. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 229–275.

  • Maudlin, T. (1988). The essence of space–time. In A. Fine & J. Leplin (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1988 biennial meeting of the philosophy of science association, vol. 2. East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 82–91.

  • Muller, F. A. (2011). How to defeat Wüthrich’s abysmal embarrassment argument against space-time structuralism. Philosophy of Science, 78, 1046–1057.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller, F. A., & Saunders, S. (2008). Discerning fermions. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 59, 499–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muller, F. A., & Seevinck, M. (2009). Discerning elementary particles. Philosophy of Science, 76, 179–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norton, J. (1988). The hole argument. In A. Fine & J. Leplin (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1988 biennial meeting of the philosophy of science association. Vol. 2. East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 56–64.

  • Rickles, D., & French, S. (2006). Quantum gravity meets structuralism: Interweaving relations in the foundations of physics. In S. French, D. Rickles, & J. Saatsi (Eds.), Structural foundations of quantum gravity (pp. 1–39). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rovelli, C. (2007). Quantum gravity. In J. N. Butterfield & J. Earman (Eds.), Handbook of the philosophy of science. Philosophy of physics. Part B. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 1287–1329.

  • Ruetsche, L. (2004). Intrinsically mixed states: An appreciation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 35, 221–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rynasiewicz, R. (1996). Absolute versus relational space-time: An outmoded debate? Journal of Philosophy, 93, 279–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schrödinger, E. (1935a). Die gegenwärtige Situation in der Quantenmechanik. Naturwissenschaften 23, pp. 807–812, 823–828, 844–849.

  • Schrödinger, E. (1935b). Discussion of probability relations between separated systems. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 31, 555–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shimony, A. (1993). Search for a naturalistic world view. vol. 2: Natural science and metaphysics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Strawson, G. (2008). The identity of the categorical and the dispositional. Analysis, 68, 271–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teller, P. (1986). Relational holism and quantum mechanics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 37, 71–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, D. (2006). In defence of naiveté: The conceptual status of Lagrangian quantum field theory. Synthese, 151, 33–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worrall, J. (1989). Structural realism: The best of two worlds? Dialectica, 43, 99–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wüthrich, C. (2009). Challenging the spacetime structuralist. Philosophy of Science, 76, 1039–1051.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank an anonymous referee for comments on the first version of this paper. VL is grateful to the Australian Research Council (ARC) for financial support (Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DECRA), project DE120102308).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of History, Philosophy, Religion and Classics, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Vincent Lam

  2. Section de Philosophie, Université de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Michael Esfeld

Authors
  1. Vincent Lam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Esfeld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Esfeld.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lam, V., Esfeld, M. The Structural Metaphysics of Quantum Theory and General Relativity. J Gen Philos Sci 43, 243–258 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-012-9197-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-012-9197-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation