KUANTUM TEORİSİ BAĞLAMINDA EINSTEIN’IN NEDENSELLİK DÜŞÜNCESİ VE ETKİLERİ

Öz

Newton fiziğinde köklü bir yere sahip olan nedensellik ilkesi, maddenin parçacıklı yapısının keşfinden sonra gelişen kuantum fiziğinde ortaya çıkan süreksizlik, belirsizlik, dalga fonksiyonunun çöküşü gibi bulgularla ciddi şekilde sorgulanır ve hatta reddedilir hale gelmiştir. Nitekim kuantumun Kopenhagcı yorumu, makro düzeyde istatistiksel bir nedensellikten söz edebilsek bile, mikro düzeyde doğaya içkin bir nedenselliğin bulunmadığını savunmuştur. Buna karşın Einstein ve onu izleyen kimi fizikçiler, kuantum teorinin eksik olabileceğini veya farklı yorumlanabileceğini, bu yüzden doğaya içkin nedenselliğin reddi konusunda aceleci davranmamak gerektiğini savunmuşlardır. Onlara göre, belki de mikro düzeyde nedenselliğin aleyhine gibi görünen durumlar, ontolojik değil epistemolojik kaynaklıdır; bundan emin olmak gerekir. Bu iddia aslında sorunu felsefi bir bağlama taşımakta, ontolojik ve epistemolojik olan arasında bir ayrım yaparak, epistemik gerekçelerle ontolojik nedenselliğin reddinin sorunlu olabileceğini ima etmektedir. Ancak süreç içerisinde Kopenhagcıların, kuantum düzeyinde, ontolojik bir ilke olarak nedenselliğin işlemediği düşüncesi fizikçilerin çoğunluğunu ikna etmiş ve doğaya içkin bir nedenselliğin bulunmadığı düşüncesi genel kabul görmüştür. Fakat süreç içerisinde Einstein’ı takip ederek bu düşünceye karşı çıkan fizikçiler de yetişmiştir. İşte bu çalışmanın amacı, kuantum fiziğinin Kopenhag yorumuna karşı Einstein ile başlayan ve doğaya içkin nedenselliğin bulunduğu iddiasını dillendiren yaklaşımın geldiği noktayı, Einstein sonrası çalışmalar ve yorumlar ışığında ortaya koymaktır. Böylelikle aslında, doğaya içkin bir nedenselliğin bulunup bulunmadığı konusundaki tartışmaların tümüyle sonlanmadığını, bu konuda hala felsefi ve bilimsel düzlemde lehte ve aleyhte pek çok argümanın geliştirildiğini göstermeyi umuyoruz.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Nedensellik
• Süreksizlik
• Belirsizlik
• Einstein
• Kuantum Teorisi

EINSTEIN'S INSIGHT OF CAUSALITY AND ITS EFFECTS IN THE CONTEXT OF QUANTUM THEORY

Abstract

The causality principle, which has a deep-rooted place in Newtonian physics, has become seriously questioned and even rejected by findings such as discontinuity, uncertainty, collapse of the wave function, which emerged in quantum physics, which developed after the discovery of the particulate structure of matter. As a matter of fact, the Copenhagenian interpretation of quantum argued that even if we can talk about statistical causality at the macro level, there is no causality inherent in nature at the micro level. On the other hand, Einstein and some physicists who followed him argued that quantum theory might be incomplete or could be interpreted differently, so one should not be hasty in rejecting causality inherent in nature. According to them, perhaps the situations that seem to be against causality at the micro level are epistemological rather than ontological; you need to be sure of that. This claim actually carries the problem to a philosophical context, making a distinction between ontological and epistemological, implying that the rejection of ontological causality on epistemic grounds may be problematic. However, in the process, the Copenhageners thought that causality as an ontological principle did not work at the quantum level convinced the majority of physicists, and the idea that there was no causality inherent in nature was generally accepted. But in the process, physicists who followed Einstein and opposed this idea were also trained. The aim of this study is to reveal the point reached by the approach that started with Einstein against the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics and voiced the claim that there is causality inherent in nature, in the light of post-Einstein studies and interpretations. In this way, we hope to show that the debates about whether there is an inherent causality in nature are not completely over, and that there are still many arguments for and against this issue on the philosophical and scientific plane.

Keywords

• Causality
• Discontinuity
• Uncertanity
• Einstein
• Quantum Theory

Kaynakça

1. Aspect, Alain, Philippe Grangier, and Gérard Roger. “Experimental tests of realistic local theories via Bell’s theorem”, Physics Review Letter 47 (1981): 460–463; ibid. ‘Experimental realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm Gedankenexperiment: A new violation of Bell’s inequalities”, Physics Review Letter, 49 (1982): 91–94
2. Ball, Philip. Tuhafı Aşma Zamanı, çev. Nedim Çatlı, İstanbul: Kolektif Kitap: 2019
3. Bell, John S., Isham, C., Penrose, R., Sciama, D. “Quantum mechanics for cosmologists”, John S Bell On The Foundations Of Quantum Mechanics (2001): 99-125, Erişim Tarihi: 12 Şubat, https://books.google.com.tr/books?hl=tr&lr=&id=pufUCgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA99&dq=J.+S.+Bell,+%E2%80%98Quantum+Mechanics+for+Cosmologists&ots=ARatmqj0K7&sig=X1EwKCSFkHVtkxEjGlBBj-wkd_0&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=solipsism&f=false
4. Belousek, Darrin W. “Einstein’s 1927 unpublished hidden-variable theory: It’s background, context and significance”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 27.4 (1996): 437-461, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1355-2198(96)00015-9
5. Ben-Menahem, Yemima. “Quantum theory and the flight from realism”, Book reviews / Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 33 (2002): 587-591, doi: 10.1016/S1355-2198(02)00022-9
6. Bohm, David. Causality and Change İn Modern Physics, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1996.
7. Bohm, David. “A suggested interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of ‘hidden’ variables” (parts I and II) Physics Review, 85 (1952): 166-193, Erişim Tarihi: 12 Şubat, https://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.85.166
8. Bohr, Niels. “Quantum mechanics and physical reality”. Nature 136.3428 (1935): 65-65, https://doi.org/10.1038/136065a0

9. Bohr, Niels. “The causality problem in atomic physics”, New theories in physics, Paris: International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation 17 (1939): 11-30, Erişim Tarihi: 12 Şubat, https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:17055948
10. Bohr, Niels. “The quantum postulate and the recent development of atomic theory”, Nature 121: (1928): 584, Erişim Tarihi: Şubat 12, https://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/bohr/Como_Nature.pdf
11. Bohr, Niels. “The quantum postulate and the recent development of atomic theory”, Nature 121: (1928): 584, Erişim Tarihi: Şubat 12, https://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/bohr/Como_Nature.pdf
12. Cevizci, Ahmet. Felsefe Sözlüğü, İstanbul: Paradigma Yayıncılık, 2010, 1146
13. Cushing, James T. Quantum mechanics: historical contingency and the Copenhagen hegemony. University of Chicago Press, 1994, Erişim Tarihi: 12 Şubat, https://books.google.com.tr/books?hl=tr&lr=&id=kTewHaL8fvgC&oi=fnd&pg=PR11&ots=QMMws1NTwm&sig=wy_m6XcDOe9UXldNI9ELVmgvOnQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
14. Dick, Rainer. “Quantum jumps, superpositions, and the continuous evolution of quantum states” , Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 57 (2017): 115-125, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsb.2016.10.003
15. Dudeja, Jai Paul, "Can we influence certain events that occurred in the past? Interpreting ‘delayed choice quantum eraser’experiment," International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews 6.2 (2019): 217-226. Erişim Tarihi: 26 Mart, http://www.ijrar.com/upload_issue/ijrar_issue_20543504.pdf
16. Einstein, Albert; Podolsky, Boris ve Nathan, Rosen. ”Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?”, Physical Review 4 (1935): 777-780, Erişim Tarihi: 12 Şubat, https://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.47.777
17. Ellerman, David. "Why delayed choice experiments do not imply retrocausality," Quantum Studies: Mathematics and Foundations 2.2 (2015): 183-199. Erişim Tarihi: 26 Mart, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40509-014-0026-2
18. Faetti, Sandro. "Alternative analysis of the delayed-choice quantum eraser with two entangled particles," arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.04101 (2019). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1912.04101
19. Gribbin, John. Mikro-Nano Dünya ve Onu A’dan Z’ye Güden Kuantum Ansiklopedik Sözlük, çev. Ömür Akyüz, İstanbul: Alfa Yayınları, 2021
20. Gribbin, John. Schrödingerin Yavru Kedileri, çev. Nedim Çatlı, İstanbul: Metis Yayınları, 2008
21. Heisenberg, Werner. Fizik ve Felsefe, çev. İshak Arslan, İstanbul: Küre Yayınları, 2020, 32
22. Heisenberg, Werner. Parça ve Bütün, çev. Ayşe Atalay, İstanbul: Düzlem Yayınları, 1990
23. Heisenberg, Werner. Physics and philosophy, New York: Penguin Science, 1962
24. Holland, Peter R. The quantum theory of motion: an account of the de Broglie-Bohm causal interpretation of quantum mechanics. Cambridge University press: 1995, Erişim Tarihi: 12 Şubat, https://books.google.com.tr/books?hl=tr&lr=&id=BsEfVBzToRMC&oi=fnd&pg=PR17&ots=21t94ip0He&sig=D8yiziRHYK3kWYTo0vCrH6xrWLI&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=tactical&f=false
25. Hulswit, Menno. From Cause to Causation. A Peircean Perspective, Dordrecht, USA: Kluwer Publishers, 2002.
26. Kent, Adrian. “Causal Quantum Theory and the Collapse Locality Loophole”, Physical Review A, 72.1 (2005): 012107, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.72.012107
27. Ma, Xiao-Song; Johannes Kofler, Angie Qarry, Nuray Tetik, Thomas Scheidl, Rupert Ursin , Sven Ramelow Thomas Herbst Lothar Ratschbacher, Alessandro Fedrizzi, Thomas Jennewein ve Anton Zeilinger. “Quantum erasure with causally disconnected choice,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110.4(2013): 1221-1226. https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.1213201110
28. Monnod, Emmanuel. “Einstein, Heisenberg, Kant: methodological distinction and conditions of possibilities”, Information and Organization 14 (2004):105-121, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2003.12.001
29. Nadler, Stevan. Causation in Early Modern Philosophy (Cartesianism, Occasionalism, and Preestablished Harmony), USA: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1993.
30. Planck, M. “Doğadaki Nedensellik”, Modern Doğa Anlayışı ve Kuantum Teorisine Giriş içinde, çev. Yılmaz Öner, İstanbul: Spartaküs Yayınları, 1996.
31. Planck, Max. “Nedensellik Yasası ve İrade Özgürlüğü”, Modern Doğa Anlayışı ve Kuantum Teorisine Giriş içinde, çev. Yılmaz Öner, İstanbul: Spartaküs Yayınları, 1996.
32. Prigogine, Ilya. Kesinliklerin Sonu, yay. yön. İbrahim Şener, İstanbul: İzdüşüm Yayınları, 2004
33. Qureshi, Tabish. "The delayed-choice quantum eraser leaves no choice," International Journal of Theoretical Physics 60.8 (2021): 3076-3086. Erişim Tarihi: 26 Mart, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10773-021-04906-w,
34. Qureshi, Tabish. "Demystifying the delayed-choice quantum eraser." European Journal of Physics 41.5 (2020): 055403. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6404/ab923e/meta Özlem, Doğan. Mantık, İstanbul: Anahtar Yayınları, 1994
35. Schopenhauer, Arthur. Yeterli Temel İlkesinin Dörtlü Kökü, çeviren: A. Onur Ateş, İstanbul: Doğubatı Yayınları, 2020
36. Schrödinger, Erwin. “The Present Situation in Quantum Mechanics: A Translation of Schrödinger's "Cat Paradox" Paper”, İngilizceye çev. John D. Trimmer, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society (1980): 323-338, Erişim Tarihi: 12 Şubat, https://www.jstor.org/stable/986572
37. Schrödinger, Erwin. Doğa ve Yunanlılar&Bilim ve Hümanizm, çev. Aynur Başpınar, İstanbul: Babil Kitap, 2020
38. Stenger, Vitor J. Bilinçsiz Kuantum, çev. Murat Havzalıç, İstanbul: Ginko Kitap, 2019.
39. Tanona, Scott. “Uncertainty in Bohr’s response to the Heisenberg microscope”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 35 (2004): 483-507, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsb.2004.04.007
40. Whittaker, Andrew. Einstein, Bohr and the Quantum Dilemma, Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1996, 254 (pdf)
41. Wiseman, HM, “From Einstein's Theorem to Bell's Theorem: a history of quantum nonlocality”, Contemporary Physics 47.2 (2006):79-88, https://doi.org/10.1080/00107510600581011
42. Wolf, Fred Alan. Kuantum Bilmecesi, çev. Mihriban Doğan, İstanbul: Omega Yayınları, 2011
43. Zhi-YuanZhouabZhi-HanZhuacShi-LongLiuabYin-HaiLiabShuaiShiabDong-ShengDingabLi-XiangChenadWeiGaoacGuang-CanGuoabBao-SenShiab. “Quantum twisted double-slits experiments: confirming wavefunctions’ physical reality,” Science bulletin, 2017, 62.17: 1185-1192.