PhilArchive
open access
Quantum Location Is Not Indeterminate Location
It has been argued that quantum mechanics provides the best case for thinking there is genuine metaphysical indeterminacy. In particular, it seems that the locations of quantum systems are indeterminate in a way that doesn’t depend on semantic or epistemic limitations. In this paper, I draw on concepts from the metaphysics of location to dispel this impression. Using quantum versions of exact and weak location introduced by Pashby (2016), I distinguish two accounts of quantum location: the spanner view and the inexact location view. Each account requires the rejection of an intuitive locative principle, but I argue that neither gives rise to metaphysical indeterminacy
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Multi-location : une solution ontologique pour le paradoxe des fentes de Young, le paradoxe EPR, et le paradoxe des sphères de Black-Leslie#99386
- Relativized Rankings#84950
- Having it Both Ways: Consciousness, Unique Not Otherworldly#727430
- Epistemic Projects, Indispensability, and the Structure of Modal Thought#708045
- Relative Positionalism and Variable Arity Relations#720552
Record · ID 717751
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive