29/11/2023, 12:44 Can We Philosophize the Quantum Leap?

Can We Philosophize the Quantum Leap?

Katherine Everitt
9 November 2023

The quantum leap: that the electron instantaneously moves between energy levels
in the atomic cloud – is this not an example of Aufhebung in nature?[1]

If we read the works of Hegel, Aufhebung, or sublation, describes the sudden

change between one logical determination and the next. As Hegel writes in the
“Preface” to The Phenomenology of Spirit, at a certain point, the dawn breaks.[2]
This is Aufhebung: that a qualitative shift occurs. A new identity is born. The night
sky necessarily leaps into this new identity of dawn – incremental transition fails to
describe what occurs. Likewise, the electron changes position in the cloud, not in
an incremental way, it leaps. It jumps.

Can we draw a parallel between Aufhebung in logic and the quantum leap in
nature? In a radical way, the quantum leap is Aufhebung, resulting specifically
from our observation of nature.

If we look at an age-old paradox, Achilles will eventually overtake the tortoise –

not in a rational incremental way, as Zeno points out, but in a leap. What this

https://www.sublationmag.com/post/can-we-philosophize-the-quantum-leap 1/3
29/11/2023, 12:44 Can We Philosophize the Quantum Leap?

highlights for us is that there are incremental striations of nature, but likewise
smooth leaps.

Much like a standard film is displayed in 24 frames per second, the eye smooths
over these broken points. This is the dialectic between discreteness and
continuity, which can be found both in logic and in nature. We may incrementalize
the frames in a film or the distance between Achilles and the tortoise, but at a
certain point, we leap ahead. We smooth over the finite edges.

If leaps occur in both logic and nature, under what conditions can we call this the
same leap?

Following Slavoj Žižek, who has taken seriously the work of quantum physicists
for the last three decades, quantum physics presents a novel opportunity to rejoin
science and philosophy, precisely because it uniquely demonstrates that the
observer is entangled with what is observed.[3]

As Karen Barad articulates in her book Meeting the Universe Halfway, quantum
physics examines the ontological co-constitution between subject and object.[4]
As the old Hegelian adage goes, “not just as substance but just as much as
subject,” substance and subject co-determine.[5]

The quantum leap is an observed phenomenon that necessarily arises because

we have inserted ourselves as observers. Before observation, the electron is said
to be in the electron cloud – not in a state of movement, but in a state of
indeterminacy.[6] After we observe the electron, we force it into a position. Our
determination is entangled with its actual ontological character.

Contrary to a Kantian interpretation, it is not that the electron exists at a particular

point in the cloud, and we just can’t locate it. In a stronger, Hegelian reading, the
electron is ontologically indeterminate until we determine it. That’s not to say there
is nothing before we observe it, but rather, that the ontological character of the
electron is indeterminate prior to observation.[7]

In a manner that defies classical physics, we observe that the electron jumps
between energy levels. It does not move piecemeal; it instantaneously changes
rungs.

There are two dialectical movements at play. First, there is both the pinpointed
position of the observed electron, andthe indeterminacy of the electron cloud.

https://www.sublationmag.com/post/can-we-philosophize-the-quantum-leap 2/3
29/11/2023, 12:44 Can We Philosophize the Quantum Leap?

Both are ontological states of the electron.

Second, once we have determined where the electron is and incrementalized the
atom into energy levels, these increments themselves reach a limit. This is one
demonstration of Planck’s scale. We cannot keep subdividing, like with Achilles
and the tortoise, because at a certain point, we leap ahead.

What we learn from interpreting the quantum leap as Aufhebung is that, much like
when we read Hegel and we move from determination to determination, we move
incrementally until we suddenly leap ahead. It is not simply that the quantum leap
is both a naturalistic and logical phenomenon. It is that determination as such,
both in nature and in logic, operates vis a vis incremental steps and sudden leaps.

And so, in a way, when we reach a conclusion, we are always jumping to it.

[1] Rovelli, Carlo (2014) Reality Is Not What It Seems: The Journey to Quantum
Gravity. Translated by Simon Carnell and Erica Segre. Republished by Riverhead
Books in 2017. p. 170.
[2] Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich (1807) The Phenomenology of Spirit.
Translated by Terry Pinkard. Republished in 2018 by Cambridge University Press.
p. 9.
[3] To cite all works in which Žižek has discussed quantum physics would be
lengthy, so here I direct you to one example: Žižek, Slavoj (2023) “From Quantum
Mechanics to Quantum Reality.” Filozofia. Vol 78: 6. p. 409-428.
[4] Barad, Karen (2007) Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the
Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Duke University Press. p. 56.
[5] The Phenomenology of Spirit. p. 12.
[6] Meeting the Universe Halfway. p. 115.
[7] Ibid.

https://www.sublationmag.com/post/can-we-philosophize-the-quantum-leap 3/3