Source
Dorato (2015), LIT-176, §5 (pp. 13–15), read in full in NOTE-105.
What was actually shown
The target. Esfeld et al. (2013, 2015): bare matter points with no intrinsic properties, individuated by metrical relations, and ψ as a law-grounding power of the configuration of all particles in the universe.
The argument (§5).
- (a) A holistic power carried by relata with no intrinsic power is of unclear intelligibility. The fix is to give each particle an intrinsic power that helps give rise to the holistic one (p. 13). This is posed as questions, “not … a definite rejection” (NOTE-105, C5, weak).
- (c) When a subsystem is effectively decoupled, the masses in its Hamiltonian must be intrinsic dispositions of its particles. So Esfeld et al. “need to alter the ontology” in passing from the universal to the effective wave function, while intrinsic event-dispositions need no change (pp. 14–15; C6, moderate).
- (b) For Bohmian spin, the analogue of fragility is “the disposition to have a definite spin in a given direction” in a measurement context (pp. 13–14; C8, weak).
Independent support. Gao (LIT-121, ch. 3, fn. 5 p. 30) makes a parallel objection: the effective ψ of a factorised subsystem does not encode the influence of other particles (NOTE-105, NOTE-140).
What could have come out otherwise. The effective wave function could have been recoverable from the universal holistic power alone, with no property of the subsystem’s particles. Dorato argues it is not, because of the masses.
What this does not say
- That events are needed. The paper shows that an event ontology fits GRWf, GRWm, Bohmian mechanics and the ψ-antirealist views of Bohr, Rovelli, Haag and Pashby (§§3–4). Something every interpretation can host constrains none of them (NOTE-105, Limitations; C1, C3).
- That events differ from matter points. Dorato concedes the two views would differ only verbally if events lacked intrinsic powers (p. 8, C4). How events relate to powers is deferred (p. 15).
- That holistic dispositionalism is refuted. Nothing is proved against it; the effective-wave-function argument is the one step of moderate strength.
- That intrinsic dispositions handle entanglement. Whether they can reproduce non-factorisable dynamics without a holistic power is open. Belot’s particle-in-a-box case (THEORY-635) is the test Dorato does not address.
Connections
- The cost of identifying ψ with induced velocity dispositions is THEORY-635. The nomological readings Esfeld’s view belongs near are THEORY-669.
- Rovelli’s relational reading (THEORY-621) is Dorato’s first ψ-antirealist brand of event ontology, and Rovelli cites Dorato three times (NOTE-174).