Our Fundamental Physical Space: An Essay on the Metaphysics of the Wave Function

Abstract

The mathematical structure of realist quantum theories has given rise to a debate about how our ordinary 3-dimensional space is related to the 3N-dimensional configuration space on which the wave function is defined. Which of the two spaces is our (more) fundamental physical space? I review the debate between 3N-Fundamentalists and 3D-Fundamentalists and evaluate it based on three criteria. I argue that when we consider which view leads to a deeper understanding of the physical world, especially given the deeper topological explanation from the unordered configurations to the Symmetrization Postulate, we have strong reasons in favor of 3D-Fundamentalism. I conclude that our evidence favors the view that our fundamental physical space in a quantum world is 3-dimensional rather than 3N-dimensional. I outline lines of future research where the evidential balance can be restored or reversed. Finally, I draw lessons from this case study to the debate about theoretical equivalence.

arXiv commentPenultimate Draft. Please cite the published version (2017)

References in corpus (2)

• Topological Factors Derived From Bohmian Mechanics
• Quantum Mechanics in Multiply-Connected Spaces

Cited by in corpus (8)

• Quantum Mechanics in a Time-Asymmetric Universe: On the Nature of the Initial Quantum State
• Realism about the Wave Function
• Understanding quantum mechanics: a review and synthesis in precise language
• Electron Charge Density: A Clue from Quantum Chemistry for Quantum Foundations
• From Time Asymmetry to Quantum Entanglement: The Humean Unification
• A representation of the wave function on the three-dimensional space
• A puzzle for the field ontologists
• Is the Wavefunction Already an Object on Space?