A Set-Theoretic Metaphysics for Wavefunction

Paul Tappenden

2023-11-01

Abstract:Set theory brought revolution to philosophy of mathematics and it can bring revolution to philosophy of physics too. All that stands in the way is the intuition that sets of physical objects cannot themselves be physical objects, which appears to derive from the ubiquitous assumption that it is possible for there to exist numerically distinct observers in qualitatively identical cognitive states. Overturning that assumption allows construing the wavefunction of an elementary particle as being a set of elemental particles with definite properties. A free electron in an observers universe is a set of elemental electrons on different trajectories, each in an elemental parallel universe. For any region in an observers environment which includes part of the environmental electrons wavefunction there is a subset of elemental electrons located in parallel elemental regions. The measure of that subset on the set which is the environmental electron is the absolute square of quantum amplitude for the environmental region. Decoherence induces Everettian branching as the partitioning of wavefunction into subsets whose measures are the objective probabilities of quasi-classical events within branches. Phase arises through interactions between elemental universes, as with Many Interacting Worlds theory, the difference being that an observers environment is constituted by a set of worlds. That environment contains superpositions as sets of elemental particle configurations.

Quantum Physics,History and Philosophy of Physics

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The core problem that this paper attempts to solve is about the nature of the wave function in quantum mechanics and its position in physical reality. Specifically, the author Paul Tappenden proposes a metaphysical framework based on set theory to re - interpret the wave function, aiming to overcome the difficulties in existing theories (such as pilot - wave theory and the many - worlds interpretation).

### Main problems:
1. **Reality of the wave function**: In existing theories, the wave function is considered abstract rather than a concrete physical object. This has led to confusion about the ontological status of the wave function. For example, what exactly is the wave function in the many - worlds interpretation? How is it related to the concrete physical reality?
2. **Role of the observer**: Traditionally, the existence and cognitive state of the observer are considered independent, but this assumption has encountered difficulties in dealing with quantum phenomena. For example, Hilary Putnam's "Twin Earth" thought experiment shows that even if the physical states of observers are the same, their cognitive contents may be different.
3. **Quantum entanglement and branching**: How to understand the decoherence process of quantum systems and the resulting many - worlds branching? The existing many - worlds interpretation has difficulties in explaining the ontological status of these branches.

### Solutions:
1. **Set - theoretic metaphysics**: The author proposes to regard the wave function as a set of fundamental particles with definite properties. The particles in each environment are actually a set of collections of fundamental particles, and each fundamental particle is located in a different "parallel universe". In this way, the wave function can be understood as a concrete physical object rather than an abstract concept.
2. **Observer and multiverse**: The author introduces the concept of "Unitary Mind", that is, the mental state of an observer can be instantiated by multiple brain - like objects. This means that the existence of an observer in the multiverse is not a one - to - one relationship, but a many - to - one relationship. This solves the problem in Putnam's thought experiment and provides a new way to understand the role of the observer in the quantum system.
3. **Quantum branching and probability**: The author believes that the decoherence process of a quantum system can be understood as a set - theoretic decomposition of the wave function, that is, the wave function is divided into multiple subsets, and each subset corresponds to a specific measurement result. The probability measures of these subsets correspond to the objective probabilities of the measurement results. In this way, quantum branching can be understood as an actually occurring process, rather than just a possible result.

### Formula examples:
- **Absolute square of the wave function**: The absolute square of \(\psi(x)\), \(\left|\psi(x)\right|^2\), represents the probability density of finding a particle at position \(x\).
- **Subset measure**: If \(\psi\) is the wave function of environmental electrons, then for any region \(R\), the measure \(\mu(S_R)\) of the subset \(S_R\) can be expressed as:
\[
\mu(S_R)=\int_R \left|\psi(x)\right|^2 \, dx
\]

Through these methods, the author attempts to provide a more consistent and intuitive explanation for quantum mechanics while solving the philosophical and physical problems in existing theories.