The three major theoretical principles of quantum mechanics relevant to its interpretation are: (T1), linearity; (T2), invariance under certain groups; and (T3) the orthogonality and isolation of the different branches of the state vector. These three imply the particle-like properties of mass, energy, momentum, spin, charge, and locality are actually properties of the state vector; and this in turn implies there is no evidence for the existence of particles. Experimentally there is no evidence for collapse (E1) and theoretically linearity prohibits collapse. One also has the experimentally verified probability law (E2), which is found to rule out the many-worlds interpretation. The failure of these three major interpretation, particles, collapse, and many-worlds, apparently implies an acceptable interpretation must be based on perception. Rather than being a separate principle, probability follows in this interpretation from a weak assumption on perception plus the combinatorics when an experiment is run many times. This suggests a relatively simple experimental test of the perception interpretation.
The three major theoretical principles of quantum mechanics relevant to its interpretation are: (T1), linearity; (T2), invariance under certain groups; and (T3) the orthogonality and isolation of the different branches of the state vector. These three imply the particle-like properties of mass, energy, momentum, spin, charge, and locality are actually properties of the state vector; and this in turn implies there is no evidence for the existence of particles. Experimentally there is no evidence for collapse (E1) and theoretically linearity prohibits collapse. One also has the experimentally verified probability law (E2), which is found to rule out the many-worlds interpretation. The failure of these three major interpretation, particles, collapse, and many-worlds, apparently implies an acceptable interpretation must be based on perception. Rather than being a separate principle, probability follows in this interpretation from a weak assumption on perception plus the combinatorics when an experiment is run many times. This suggests a relatively simple experimental test of the perception interpretation.
A succinct statement and justification of all the principles necessary to understand and evaluate interpretations of quantum mechanics is given. These principles provide strong constraints on interpretations. They imply the particle-like properties of mass, energy, momentum, spin, charge, and locality are actually properties of the wave function, and this in turn implies there is no evidence for the existence of particles. In addition, there is currently no experimental evidence for collapse, and a theory of collapse encounters significant hurdles. Further, the probability law is found to rule out the many-worlds interpretation, so all three major interpretations encounter serious to fatal problems. An interpretation which conforms to all the principles is given.
A type of mechanics will be presented that possesses some distinctive properties. On the one hand, its physical description & rules of operation are readily comprehensible & intuitively clear. On the other, it fully satisfies all observable predictions of non-relativistic quantum mechanics. Within it, particles exist at points in space, follow continuous, piecewise differentiable paths, and their linear momentum is equal to their mass times their velocity along their path. Yet the probabilities for position and momentum, conditioned on the state of the particle's environment, follow the rules of quantum theory. Indeed, all observable consequences of quantum theory are satisfied; particles can be entangled, have intrinsic spin, this spin is not local to the particle, particle identity can effect probabilities, and so forth. All the rules of quantum mechanics are obeyed, and all arise in a straightforward fashion. After this is established, connections will be drawn out between this type of mechanics and other types of quantum worlds; those that obey Bohmian mechanics, stochastic mechanics, the many worlds interpretation, and physical collapse. In the final section, a relativistic version of the mechanics will be presented.
Linearity allows several versions of reality to simultaneously exist in the state vector. But it implies that there is no interaction between versions, and that there will never be perception of more than one version. It also implies, in conjunction with group representation theory, that the particle-like properties of mass, energy, momentum, spin and charge are attributes of the state vectors. These results can be used to show there is no evidence for the objective existence of particles. The properties of the wave function are sufficient to explain all the particle-like properties of matter. Representation theory is also extensively employed in the Standard Model, with gauge fields transforming as representations of the internal symmetry group. And when applied to the permutation group, it is essential for understanding symmetric and antisymmetric states. In fact all of quantum mechanics is set up exactly as if it were the representation of an underlying pre-representational theory. A linear equation structure for the underlying theory is suggested, and it is shown in outline how quantum field theory emerges as a representational form of the pre-representational theory.
The basic mathematical structure, QM-A, of the many worlds interpretation consists solely of the linear mathematics plus the Hilbert space properties of the state vectors. There is no collapse and there are no particles or hidden variables. It is remarkable that QM-A alone can account for all our observations except probability. There is no need for particles, hidden variables or collapse to explain perception of only one classical version of reality, the photoelectric effect, localized effects from a spread-out wave function in scattering and interference experiments, wave-particle duality, and so on. But probability cannot be defined within QM-A. Nevertheless, because of its astonishing success, it seems reasonable to require (1) that the mathematics of an interpretation be limited to the highly successful QM-A and (2) that "matter" be composed of state vectors alone. But the probability law requires, in essence, that one version of the observer be singled out. The most straightforward way to accomplish this under (1) and (2) is to assume there is an aspect of the observer-the Mind-which is outside the laws of quantum mechanics and perceives just one version of reality. Under that assumption, the probability law can then be derived. Thus we have an interpretation, QM-A plus "outside" observer, which explains all our perceptions.
At present, there are two possible, and equally plausible, explanations for the physics of quantum measurement. The first explanation, known as the many-worlds interpretation, does not require any modification of quantum mechanics, and asserts that at the time of measurement the Universe splits into many branches, one branch for every possible alternative. The various branches do not interfere with each other because of decoherence, thus providing a picture broadly consistent with the observed Universe. The second explanation, which requires quantum mechanics to be modified from its presently known form, is that at the time of measurement the wave-function collapses into one of the possible alternatives. The two explanations are mutually exclusive, and up until now, no theoretical reasoning has been put forward to choose one explanation over the other. In this article, we provide an argument which implies that the collapse interpretation is favored over the many-worlds interpretation. Our starting point is the assertion (which we justify) that there ought to exist a reformulation of quantum mechanics which does not refer to a classical spacetime manifold. The need for such a reformulation implies that quantum theory becomes non-linear on the Planck mass/energy scale. Standard linear quantum mechanics is an approximation to this non-linear theory, valid at energy scales much smaller than the Planck scale. Using ideas based on noncommutative | >=
An interpretation of quantum mechanics involving multiple dimensions is proposed, as well as a thought experiment that in principle if performed correctly could either prove or disprove quantum randomness. All outcomes, of a particle’s wave function manifest but manifest in more than three dimensions, and when the wave function collapses, we see the outcome of the wave function, which only exist in three dimensions. Furthermore, a particle is a much larger object, and exists physically as a wave across more than three dimensions and our best description of this is the Schrodinger wave, because it only describes it in three dimensions. We cannot observe the particle as a wave because it is spread out as an object in which most of it exists in more than three dimensions, but when we observe the part or outcome of a wave function that does exist in three dimensions, which is when collapse occurs it leads to particle like properties, due to not being able to interact with the rest of the wave because it is confined to just interacting on a three dimensional scale because we are observing it in three dimensions. Furthermore we cannot observe the part of the wave function that exists in more than three dimensions, in three dimensions because of the principle that in order to observe an object in it's entirety it needs to be observed in all of it's dimensions. Strange phenomenon in quantum mechanics such as tunneling, can be explained by saying that there is a probability of finding the part of wave function that exists in three dimensions on the other side of the barrier, which has travelled over that barrier classically and the probability of it travelling over the barrier decreases expontentially to the width of the barrier increasing. Whether the quantum world is random, or is determined by non-local hidden variables, can be determined by a simple deductive thought experiment as outlined in this article.