The nature of the physical worldEddington, Arthur Stanley, Sir
Philosophy
The nature of the physical world
Eddington, Arthur Stanley, Sir
Physics -- Philosophy; Science -- Philosophy
Let us take the simplest case in which we think we can predict the
future. Suppose that we have a particle with known position and
velocity at the present instant. Assuming that nothing interferes with
it we can predict the position at a subsequent instant. (Strictly
the non-interference would be a subject for another prediction, but
[Pg 307]
to simplify matters we shall concede it.) It is just this simple
prediction which the principle of indeterminacy expressly forbids. It
states that we cannot know accurately both the velocity and position of
a particle at the present instant.
At first sight there seems to be an inconsistency. There is no limit
to the accuracy with which we may know the position, provided that we
do not want to know the velocity also. Very well; let us make a highly
accurate determination of position now, and after waiting a moment
make another highly accurate determination of position. Comparing the
two accurate positions we compute the accurate velocity—and snap our
fingers at the principle of indeterminacy. This velocity, however,
is of no use for prediction, because in making the second accurate
determination of position we have rough-handled the particle so much
that it no longer has the velocity we calculated. It is a purely
retrospective velocity. The velocity does not exist in the present
tense but in the future perfect; it never exists, it never will exist,
but a time may come when it will have existed. There is no room
for it in Fig. 4 which contains an Absolute Future and an Absolute Past
but not an Absolute Future Perfect.
The velocity which we attribute to a particle now can be regarded as
an anticipation of its future positions. To say that it is unknowable
(except with a certain degree of inaccuracy) is to say that the future
cannot be anticipated. Immediately the future is accomplished, so that
it is no longer an anticipation, the velocity becomes knowable.
The classical view that a particle necessarily has a definite (but not
necessarily knowable) velocity now, amounts to disguising a piece of
[Pg 308]
the unknown future as an unknowable element of the present. Classical
physics foists a deterministic scheme on us by a trick; it smuggles the
unknown future into the present, trusting that we shall not press an
inquiry as to whether it has become any more knowable that way.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account