Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:0804.4216

Quantum Mechanics, is it magic?

Miguel Ferrero, Salgado, D., J. L. Sánchez‐Gómez

Published Apr 26, 2008• 2 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

We show that quantum mechanics is the first theory in human history that violates the basic a priori principles that have shaped human thought since immemorial times. Therefore although it is more contrary to magic than any body of knowledge could be, what could be called its magic precisely resides in this violation.
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.0804.4216

Related papers

QUANTUM MECHANICS AND MAGIC: AN OPEN DISCUSSION

Miguel Ferrero, Salgado, David, J. L. Sánchez‐Gómez

We show that quantum mechanics is the first theory in human history that violates the basic a priori principles that have shaped human thought since immemorial times. Therefore, although it is more contrary to magic than any body of knowledge could be, what could be called its magic precisely resides in this violation.

•Aug 24, 2014•0 citations

A First Introduction to Quantum Physics

Pieter Kok

Quantum mechanics is one of the crowning achievements of human thought. There is no theory that is more successful in predicting phenomena over such a wide range of situations—and with such accuracy—than quantum mechanics. From the basic principles of chemistry to the working of the semiconductors in your mobile phone, and from the Big Bang to atomic clocks, quantum mechanics comes up with the goods. At the same time, we still have trouble pinpointing exactly what the theory tells us about nature. Quantum mechanics is hard, but perhaps not as hard as you think.

•Jan 22, 2010•0 citations

The Source of Magic in the Quantum World

Miguel Ferrero, David Cienfuegos Salgado, J. L. Sánchez‐Gómez

It has been frequently said that "Quantum Mechanics is Magic".e real fact is just the opposite: quantum mechanics is not magic, it is rather one of the best scientific theories in terms of the amplitude and exactness of its predictions.Quantum Mechanics surprises us as it does not satisfy some a priori principles usually considered to be necessary preconditions to build up physics (as Einstein dixit).As these principles are also the basis of some important philosophical theories of science, these philosophical theories cannot be well founded.After criticizing them, we offer the preliminary lines of a methodology of physics adapted to the formalism of quantum mechanics.

•Jan 1, 2012•0 citations

Quantum Mechanics As a Radical Change in Paradigm in the History of Human Thought

A. V. Lankin, Genri E. Norman

Abstract We present the current state of quantum mechanics, the prospects for its development, and the strengthening of its influence on scientific and technological progress. We look at quantum mechanics from four perspectives. The first perspective astonished physicists already with the advent of quantum mechanics—it is (1) a new way of looking at the world. Over the course of a hundred years of development, quantum mechanics has acquired three more perspectives: (2) an independent field of knowledge, (3) a new physical theory, and (4) a radical change in paradigm in the history of human thought. We have named the new paradigm “neo-Copenhagen” to emphasize both its development from and its continuity with the Copenhagen interpretation. We review the problems of quantum mechanics: how experimental research progresses, how basic concepts develop, how practical applications of paradoxical ideas expand. We indicate ways to solve three Ginzburg’s “great” problems. We formulate the features of the neo-Copenhagen paradigm that have already emerged. We present a look at the future of science and technology on the three time scales.

Russian Journal of Physical Chemistry A•Oct 28, 2025•0 citations

A Critical Discussion About The Methodology Of Quantum Theory

Miguel Ferrero, Salgado, D., J. L. Sánchez‐Gómez

It is argued that the traditional "realist" methodology of physics, according to which human concepts, laws and theories can grasp the essence of reality, is incompatible with the most fruitful interpretation of quantum formalism. The proof rests on the violation by quantum mechanics of the foundational principles of that methodology. An alternative methodology, in which the construction of sciences finishes at the level of human experience, as standard quantum theory strongly suggests, is then conjectured.

arXiv:1107.3366•Jul 18, 2011•0 citations

Introduction

Daniel F. Styer

Capsule history of quantum mechanics Starting in the seventeenth century, and continuing to the present day, physicists developed a body of ideas that describe much about the world around us: the motion of a cannonball, the orbit of a planet, the working of an engine, the crack of a baseball bat. This body of ideas is called classical mechanics . In 1905, Albert Einstein realized that these ideas didn't apply to objects moving at high speeds (that is, at speeds near the speed of light) and he developed an alternative body of ideas called relativistic mechanics . Classical mechanics is wrong in principle, but it is a good approximation to relativistic mechanics when applied to objects moving at low speeds. At about the same time, several experiments led physicists to realize that the classical ideas also didn't apply to very small objects, such as atoms. Over the period 1900–1927 a number of physicists (Planck, Bohr, Einstein, Heisenberg, de Broglie, Schrödinger, and others) developed an alternative quantum mechanics . Classical mechanics is wrong in principle, but it is a good approximation to quantum mechanics when applied to large objects. What is the nature of quantum mechanics? I'm not going to spend any time on the history of quantum mechanics, which is convoluted and fascinating. Instead, I will focus on the ideas developed at the end. What sort of ideas required twenty-eight years of development from this stellar group of scientists? Einstein's theory of relativity is often (and correctly) described as strange and counterintuitive.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Feb 24, 2000•0 citations
Quantum mechanics is one of the crowning achievements of human thought. There is no theory that is more successful in predicting phenomena over such a wide range of situations—and with such accuracy—than quantum mechanics. From the basic principles of chemistry to the working of the semiconductors in your mobile phone, and from the Big Bang to atomic clocks, quantum mechanics comes up with the goods. At the same time, we still have trouble pinpointing exactly what the theory tells us about nature. Quantum mechanics is hard, but perhaps not as hard as you think.
It has been frequently said that "Quantum Mechanics is Magic".e real fact is just the opposite: quantum mechanics is not magic, it is rather one of the best scientific theories in terms of the amplitude and exactness of its predictions.Quantum Mechanics surprises us as it does not satisfy some a priori principles usually considered to be necessary preconditions to build up physics (as Einstein dixit).As these principles are also the basis of some important philosophical theories of science, these philosophical theories cannot be well founded.After criticizing them, we offer the preliminary lines of a methodology of physics adapted to the formalism of quantum mechanics.
Abstract We present the current state of quantum mechanics, the prospects for its development, and the strengthening of its influence on scientific and technological progress. We look at quantum mechanics from four perspectives. The first perspective astonished physicists already with the advent of quantum mechanics—it is (1) a new way of looking at the world. Over the course of a hundred years of development, quantum mechanics has acquired three more perspectives: (2) an independent field of knowledge, (3) a new physical theory, and (4) a radical change in paradigm in the history of human thought. We have named the new paradigm “neo-Copenhagen” to emphasize both its development from and its continuity with the Copenhagen interpretation. We review the problems of quantum mechanics: how experimental research progresses, how basic concepts develop, how practical applications of paradoxical ideas expand. We indicate ways to solve three Ginzburg’s “great” problems. We formulate the features of the neo-Copenhagen paradigm that have already emerged. We present a look at the future of science and technology on the three time scales.
It is argued that the traditional "realist" methodology of physics, according to which human concepts, laws and theories can grasp the essence of reality, is incompatible with the most fruitful interpretation of quantum formalism. The proof rests on the violation by quantum mechanics of the foundational principles of that methodology. An alternative methodology, in which the construction of sciences finishes at the level of human experience, as standard quantum theory strongly suggests, is then conjectured.
Capsule history of quantum mechanics Starting in the seventeenth century, and continuing to the present day, physicists developed a body of ideas that describe much about the world around us: the motion of a cannonball, the orbit of a planet, the working of an engine, the crack of a baseball bat. This body of ideas is called classical mechanics . In 1905, Albert Einstein realized that these ideas didn't apply to objects moving at high speeds (that is, at speeds near the speed of light) and he developed an alternative body of ideas called relativistic mechanics . Classical mechanics is wrong in principle, but it is a good approximation to relativistic mechanics when applied to objects moving at low speeds. At about the same time, several experiments led physicists to realize that the classical ideas also didn't apply to very small objects, such as atoms. Over the period 1900–1927 a number of physicists (Planck, Bohr, Einstein, Heisenberg, de Broglie, Schrödinger, and others) developed an alternative quantum mechanics . Classical mechanics is wrong in principle, but it is a good approximation to quantum mechanics when applied to large objects. What is the nature of quantum mechanics? I'm not going to spend any time on the history of quantum mechanics, which is convoluted and fascinating. Instead, I will focus on the ideas developed at the end. What sort of ideas required twenty-eight years of development from this stellar group of scientists? Einstein's theory of relativity is often (and correctly) described as strange and counterintuitive.