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

We have proposed in several recent papers a critical view of some parts ofquantum mechanics (QM) that is methodologically unusual because it rests onanalysing the language of QM by using some elementary but fundamental tools ofmathematical logic. Our approach proves that some widespread beliefs about QMcan be questioned and establishes new links with a classical view, which issignificant in the debate on the interpretations of QM. We propose here a briefsurvey of our results, highlighting their common background. We firstly showhow quantum logic (QL) can be embedded into classical logic (CL) if theembedding is required to preserve the logical order and not the algebraicstructure, and also how QL can be interpreted as a pragmatic sublanguage withina pragmatic extension of CL. Both these results challenge the thesis that CLand QL formalize the properties of different and incompatible notions of truth.We then show that quantum probability admits an epistemic interpretation ifcontextuality is taken into account as a basic constituent of the language ofQM, which overcomes the interpretation of quantum probability as ontic.Finally, we show that the proofs that QM is a contextual theory stand on asupplementary epistemological assumption that is usually unnoticed and leftimplicit. Dropping such assumption opens the way, at least in principle, tonon-contextual interpretations of QM.

Throwing bridges: where and how can classical and quantum view be connected?