Probability occupies a central role in quantum physics. The theory does not predict definite outcomes, but offers a distribution of possible results — encoded in the wavefunction and formalised by the Born rule. This statistical framework has proven astonishingly successful in practice.
Yet its ontological status remains contested. Is quantum probability a statement about our ignorance of hidden variables (as in classical statistics)? Is it a fundamental feature of reality — irreducible indeterminacy at the heart of nature? Or is it merely a calculational tool, useful but devoid of metaphysical import?
A relational ontology offers a different view: probability is not ignorance, nor is it brute randomness. It is a measure of systemic constraint — an index of how potential coheres under given conditions. Quantum probability expresses the structure of affordance within a relational field — the grammar by which coherence is possible.
1. Not Ignorance — Structured Potential
-
Classical probability reflects incomplete knowledge: a die has a definite outcome, but we do not yet know it,
-
In quantum systems, the probabilities are not about unknown values — they are expressions of what the system can actualise, given its relational configuration,
-
The wavefunction is not a hidden list of outcomes. It is a description of the system’s constrained potential.
2. The Born Rule as a Constraint Metric
-
The Born rule does not tell us which outcome will occur. It tells us how the system tends to resolve when a perspectival cut is made,
-
The square of the amplitude is not a probability in the epistemic sense. It is a measure of coherence — a weighting of how the system’s structure affords particular transitions,
-
This “probability” is neither subjective nor arbitrary. It emerges from the topology of the field itself.
3. Probability and Systemic Tension
-
Each quantum system exists within a web of tension — between what is locally constrained and what is globally coherent,
-
Probability quantifies how readily a given configuration can resolve, not because it is more real, but because it better fits the system’s internal balance,
-
The outcome is not chosen at random. It is selected by the system's own structure — a resolution of maximum compatibility under constraint.
4. No Dice at the Root of Reality
-
Einstein’s famous objection (“God does not play dice”) misunderstands the role of probability,
-
Relational ontology agrees: there are no dice — not because everything is predetermined, but because chance is not an ontological primitive,
-
What looks like randomness is the indeterminacy of a system with multiple viable resolutions, none of which is predetermined, but all of which are coherently permissible.
5. Probability as Modal Grammar
-
In a relational system, probability is not about forecasting. It is a modal grammar — a syntax of becoming, expressing which transitions are favoured, suppressed, or neutral,
-
Just as grammar structures language without dictating meaning, quantum probability structures coherence without dictating outcomes,
-
It is not what must happen, nor what might happen at whim, but what may coherently happen, given the field’s configuration.
Closing
Quantum probability does not reveal hidden truths or roll cosmic dice. It expresses the tendencies of a system to resolve its tensions — a measure of coherence in a field of constrained potential.
What we call “chance” is not chaos, but structured freedom — the field's capacity to organise itself under pressure, to actualise coherence from among its viable paths.
In the next post, we will explore entanglement — not as a spooky connection between particles, but as a fundamental expression of relational holism.
No comments:
Post a Comment