English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

I distinguish two types of reduction within the context of quantum-classicalrelations, which I designate "formal" and "empirical". Formal reduction holdsor fails to hold solely by virtue of the mathematical relationship between twotheories; it is therefore a two-place, a priori relation between theories.Empirical reduction requires one theory to encompass the range of physicalbehaviors that are well-modeled in another theory; in a certain sense, it is athree-place, a posteriori relation connecting the theories and the domain ofphysical reality that both serve to describe. Focusing on the relationshipbetween classical and quantum mechanics, I argue that while certain formalresults concerning singular limits as Planck's constant goes to zero have beentaken to preclude the possibility of reduction between these theories, suchresults at most block reduction in the formal sense; little if any reason hasbeen given for thinking that they block reduction in the empirical sense. Ithen briefly outline a strategy for empirical reduction that is suggested bywork on decoherence theory, arguing that this sort of account remains a fullyviable route to the empirical reduction of classical to quantum mechanics andis unaffected by such singular limits.

"'Formal' vs. 'Empirical' Approaches to Quantum-Classical Reduction"