Wiseman: there might be a way to prove absolutely that two particles are the same.
Yes, by observing the macroscopic statistics of experiments. Current physics understanding can only explain the results if the particles are indistinguishable in principle, not just indistinguishable with the current experiments we happen to have thought of so far.
Sure, all of physics may be overturned tomorrow with a new Einstein. But in so far as current physics theories mean anything, they require that the particles can never be distinguished in any future experiment. That’s a bit different from the argument Philosopher Bob was making, which was that we merely hadn’t thought of the correct experiment yet.
Anon: Yes, atoms can also be indistinguishable. This doesn’t make rocks “the same object”, any more than two electrons are only one electron. They’re still two electrons. But the point is that you can’t distinguish between one of them being in a given location (and the other in a different one), with vis versa. And the same, I suppose, could be true (with vanishing likelihood) of two carefully constructed rocks.
Wiseman: there might be a way to prove absolutely that two particles are the same.
Yes, by observing the macroscopic statistics of experiments. Current physics understanding can only explain the results if the particles are indistinguishable in principle, not just indistinguishable with the current experiments we happen to have thought of so far.
Sure, all of physics may be overturned tomorrow with a new Einstein. But in so far as current physics theories mean anything, they require that the particles can never be distinguished in any future experiment. That’s a bit different from the argument Philosopher Bob was making, which was that we merely hadn’t thought of the correct experiment yet.
Anon: Yes, atoms can also be indistinguishable. This doesn’t make rocks “the same object”, any more than two electrons are only one electron. They’re still two electrons. But the point is that you can’t distinguish between one of them being in a given location (and the other in a different one), with vis versa. And the same, I suppose, could be true (with vanishing likelihood) of two carefully constructed rocks.