Catálogo de publicaciones - libros

In what follows we shall give a very brief account of reversible evolution and, in particular, reversible computation by permutation.

At the moment, there exists a loosely bundled canon of quantum rules subsumed under the term or .

Some of the many accounts and many roots of quantum indeterminism are discussed.

As stated by Milonni [370, p. xiii] and others [174, 195], “  One of the observable vacuum effects is the  [565]: “ 

Egon von Schweidler, a colleague of Exner at the University of Vienna, interpreted Rutherford’s (1902) decay law as merely probabilistically – thereby allowing deviations for small sample sizes.

The physical theories of classical mechanics, electrodynamics and gravitation (relativity theory) have been developed alongside classical analysis. Thereby assumptions about the formal mathematical models for theoretical physics had to be made which were partly (to some degree of accuracy) corroborated empirically; and partly due to mere convenience.

Rather than giving a detailed account on the origin and varieties of classical determinism – which is a fascinating topic of its own a very brief sketch of some of its concepts will be given.

Classical physics, in particular, classical Newtonian mechanics, can be perceived as being modelled by systems of simultaneous differential equations of second order, for which the initial values of the variables and their derivatives are known. It slowly dawned on the mathematical physicists that the solutions, even if they satisfied Lipschitz continuity and thus were unique, could have a huge variety of solutions; with huge structural differences. Some of these solutions turned out to be .

Complementarity was first encountered in quantum mechanics. In what follows we shall present finite deterministic models featuring complementarity. The type of complementarity discussed in this chapter grew out of an attempt to understand quantum complementarity by some finite, deterministic, quasi-classical (automaton) model.

Since theological nomenclature hardly belongs to the standard repertoire of physicists but will be used later, as some will be mentioned upfront. Thereby we will mainly follow Philipp Frank’s (informal) definitions of and .