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:1109.1892

Eigenforms and Quantum Physics

Louis Hirsch Kauffman

Published Sep 9, 2011• 6 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

This essay is a discussion of Heinz von Foerster's concept of eigenform and its relationship with the foundations of physics.
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1109.1892

Related papers

The quantum formalism and its main interpretations

André Julg

Lecture notes in chemistry•Jan 1, 1998•0 citations

Eigenforms, Discrete Processes and Quantum Processes

Louis Hirsch Kauffman

This essay is a discussion of the concept of eigenform, due to Heinz von Foerster, and its relationship with discrete physics and quantum mechanics. We interpret the square root of minus one as a simple oscillatory process - a clock, and as an eigenform. By taking a generalization of this identification of i as a clock and eigenform, we show how quantum mechanics emerges from discrete physics.

Journal of Physics Conference Series•May 10, 2012•9 citations

Erwin Schrödinger and the rise of wave mechanics. II. The creation of wave mechanics

Jagdish Mehra

Foundations of Physics•Dec 1, 1987•10 citations

EmerQuM 11: Emergent Quantum Mechanics 2011 (Heinz von Foerster Congress)

Gerhard Grössing

These proceedings comprise the plenary lectures and poster contributions of the 'Heinz von Foerster Conference 2011' on Emergent Quantum Mechanics (EmerQuM11), which was held at the University of Vienna, 11?13 November 2011. With the 5th International Heinz von Foerster Conference convened at the occasion of von Foerster's 100th birthday, the organizers opted for a twin conference to take place at the Large and Small Ceremonial Halls of the University's main building, respectively. The overall topic was chosen as 'Self-Organization and Emergence', a topic to which von Foerster was an early contributor. While the first conference ('Self-Organization and Emergence in Nature and Society') addressed a more general audience, the second one ('Emergent Quantum Mechanics') was intended as a specialist meeting with a contemporary topic that could both serve as an illustration of von Foerster's intellectual heritage and, more generally, point towards future directions in physics. We thus intended to bring together many of those physicists who are interested in or are working on attempts to understand quantum mechanics as emerging from a suitable classical (or, more generally, deeper level) physics. EmerQuM11 was organized by the Austrian Institute for Nonlinear Studies (AINS), with essential support from the Wiener Institute for Social Science Documentation and Methodology (WISDOM), the Department of Contemporary History at the University of Vienna, and the Heinz von Foerster-Gesellschaft. There were a number of individuals who contributed to the smooth course of our meeting and whom I would like to sincerely thank: Christian Bischof, Thomas Elze, Marianne Ertl, Gertrud Hafner, Werner Korn, Angelika Krawanja, Florian Krug and his team, Sonja Lang, Albert M?ller, Ilse M?ller, Irene M?ller, Karl M?ller, Armin Reautschnig, Marion Schirrmacher, Anton Staudinger, Roman Zlabinger, and, last but not least, my AINS colleagues Siegfried Fussy, Herbert Schwabl and Johannes Mesa Pascasio, the latter in particular for his invaluable technical help with these proceedings. Funds made available by the Federal Ministry of Science and Research (BMWF), the City of Vienna MA7 Science Funding, the Faculty of Historical and Cultural Studies, Blaha Office Furniture, and Padma AG Zurich are gratefully acknowledged. As for the nature of the search for a 'deeper level' foundation of quantum mechanics, a first difficulty already arises with respect to the question: Where do we start? One may look for quite different points of departure, such as an encompassing theory of quantum gravity. Or one may find arguments for the necessity to base one's approach at least on a relativistic formulation of the problem. Or one may discard searching for general principles for the time being, and develop an explicit physical model first. And so on. In fact, this is actually what is happening today in different research programs for emergent quantum mechanics, a fact which is also reflected in the rich variety of approaches presented at our meeting. This may be considered a very welcome situation, reminding us of Heinz von Foerster's dictum: 'Act always so as to increase the number of choices.' However, some may view this variety also as a drawback: There is not (yet?) a single, definite alternative theory that would challenge orthodox positions, for example, by providing different experimental predictions. However, the prevailing orthodoxy has shown throughout the 20th century to the present day, that a too restrictive attitude towards theoretical alternatives can lead to almost a standstill in coping with the serious shortcomings and contradictions of present-day physics. Many of us remember famous quantum physicists repeating in an almost mantra-like fashion that quantum theory, or experimental evidence, 'excludes hidden variables as a possibility', along with a reference to some or other newly found 'impossibility proof'. Yet we also recall John Bell's famous counter-statement: 'What is proved by impossibility proofs is lack of imagination.' In this sense, therefore, our task is to make use of the variety of the different approaches offered, for it is in scrutinizing each of them that a chance for further progress and understanding may emerge. The papers collected in these proceedings essentially follow the order of the plenary talks during the conference program, with the addition of the poster presentations. Prior to the contributions to EmerQuM11, the very first paper of these proceedings presents the opening lecture by Yves Couder who addressed both twin conferences with his talk on wave-particle duality in a classical system. (Although he was not able to participate personally, the contribution of Robert Carroll, a member of the academic advisory board, is included here. Regrettably, the lectures by John Bush, Marek Czachor, Mark Everitt, Felix Finster, and Lee Smolin could not be included, partly for copyright reasons.) Finally, I would like to thank Sarah Toms and Graham Douglas and their team at IOP Publishing (Bristol) for their friendly advice and help during the preparation of these proceedings. Vienna, April 2012 Gerhard Gr?ssing

Journal of Physics Conference Series•May 10, 2012•5 citations

A glimpse to Feynman’s contributions to the debate on the foundations of quantum mechanics

Mario Di Mauro, Salvatore Esposito, Adele Naddeo

The Ninth Marcel Grossmann Meeting•Jan 24, 2023•2 citations

Observing quantum systems

Gerhard Grössing

Purpose As any attempts at explaining quantum theory in terms of simple, local “cause‐and‐effect” models have remained unsatisfactory, approaches from the perspectives of systems theory seem called for, which is rich in a variety of more complex understandings of causality. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents one option for such approaches, which the author has introduced previously as “quantum cybernetics”: considering waves (but not “wave functions”!) and “particles” as mutually dependent system components, and thus defining “organizationally closed systems” characterized by a fundamental circular causality. Using such an approach, a new look can be achieved on both classical and quantum physics. Findings It was found that quantum theory's most fundamental equation, the Schrödinger equation, can actually be derived from classical physics, once the latter is considered anew, i.e. under said approach involving both particles and (Huygens) waves. In fact, the only difference to existing views is that Huygens waves are here considered to be real, physically effective waves in some hypothesized sub‐quantum medium, rather than mere formal tools. Originality/value What is particularly new in the present paper is that quantum systems can be described by what Heinz von Foerster has called “nontrivial machines”, whereas the corresponding classical counterparts turn out to behave as “trivial machines”. This should provide enough stimulus for discussing system theoretical issues also in the context of the foundations of quantum theory.

Kybernetes•Jan 1, 2005•4 citations
These proceedings comprise the plenary lectures and poster contributions of the 'Heinz von Foerster Conference 2011' on Emergent Quantum Mechanics (EmerQuM11), which was held at the University of Vienna, 11?13 November 2011. With the 5th International Heinz von Foerster Conference convened at the occasion of von Foerster's 100th birthday, the organizers opted for a twin conference to take place at the Large and Small Ceremonial Halls of the University's main building, respectively. The overall topic was chosen as 'Self-Organization and Emergence', a topic to which von Foerster was an early contributor. While the first conference ('Self-Organization and Emergence in Nature and Society') addressed a more general audience, the second one ('Emergent Quantum Mechanics') was intended as a specialist meeting with a contemporary topic that could both serve as an illustration of von Foerster's intellectual heritage and, more generally, point towards future directions in physics. We thus intended to bring together many of those physicists who are interested in or are working on attempts to understand quantum mechanics as emerging from a suitable classical (or, more generally, deeper level) physics. EmerQuM11 was organized by the Austrian Institute for Nonlinear Studies (AINS), with essential support from the Wiener Institute for Social Science Documentation and Methodology (WISDOM), the Department of Contemporary History at the University of Vienna, and the Heinz von Foerster-Gesellschaft. There were a number of individuals who contributed to the smooth course of our meeting and whom I would like to sincerely thank: Christian Bischof, Thomas Elze, Marianne Ertl, Gertrud Hafner, Werner Korn, Angelika Krawanja, Florian Krug and his team, Sonja Lang, Albert M?ller, Ilse M?ller, Irene M?ller, Karl M?ller, Armin Reautschnig, Marion Schirrmacher, Anton Staudinger, Roman Zlabinger, and, last but not least, my AINS colleagues Siegfried Fussy, Herbert Schwabl and Johannes Mesa Pascasio, the latter in particular for his invaluable technical help with these proceedings. Funds made available by the Federal Ministry of Science and Research (BMWF), the City of Vienna MA7 Science Funding, the Faculty of Historical and Cultural Studies, Blaha Office Furniture, and Padma AG Zurich are gratefully acknowledged. As for the nature of the search for a 'deeper level' foundation of quantum mechanics, a first difficulty already arises with respect to the question: Where do we start? One may look for quite different points of departure, such as an encompassing theory of quantum gravity. Or one may find arguments for the necessity to base one's approach at least on a relativistic formulation of the problem. Or one may discard searching for general principles for the time being, and develop an explicit physical model first. And so on. In fact, this is actually what is happening today in different research programs for emergent quantum mechanics, a fact which is also reflected in the rich variety of approaches presented at our meeting. This may be considered a very welcome situation, reminding us of Heinz von Foerster's dictum: 'Act always so as to increase the number of choices.' However, some may view this variety also as a drawback: There is not (yet?) a single, definite alternative theory that would challenge orthodox positions, for example, by providing different experimental predictions. However, the prevailing orthodoxy has shown throughout the 20th century to the present day, that a too restrictive attitude towards theoretical alternatives can lead to almost a standstill in coping with the serious shortcomings and contradictions of present-day physics. Many of us remember famous quantum physicists repeating in an almost mantra-like fashion that quantum theory, or experimental evidence, 'excludes hidden variables as a possibility', along with a reference to some or other newly found 'impossibility proof'. Yet we also recall John Bell's famous counter-statement: 'What is proved by impossibility proofs is lack of imagination.' In this sense, therefore, our task is to make use of the variety of the different approaches offered, for it is in scrutinizing each of them that a chance for further progress and understanding may emerge. The papers collected in these proceedings essentially follow the order of the plenary talks during the conference program, with the addition of the poster presentations. Prior to the contributions to EmerQuM11, the very first paper of these proceedings presents the opening lecture by Yves Couder who addressed both twin conferences with his talk on wave-particle duality in a classical system. (Although he was not able to participate personally, the contribution of Robert Carroll, a member of the academic advisory board, is included here. Regrettably, the lectures by John Bush, Marek Czachor, Mark Everitt, Felix Finster, and Lee Smolin could not be included, partly for copyright reasons.) Finally, I would like to thank Sarah Toms and Graham Douglas and their team at IOP Publishing (Bristol) for their friendly advice and help during the preparation of these proceedings. Vienna, April 2012 Gerhard Gr?ssing
Purpose As any attempts at explaining quantum theory in terms of simple, local “cause‐and‐effect” models have remained unsatisfactory, approaches from the perspectives of systems theory seem called for, which is rich in a variety of more complex understandings of causality. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents one option for such approaches, which the author has introduced previously as “quantum cybernetics”: considering waves (but not “wave functions”!) and “particles” as mutually dependent system components, and thus defining “organizationally closed systems” characterized by a fundamental circular causality. Using such an approach, a new look can be achieved on both classical and quantum physics. Findings It was found that quantum theory's most fundamental equation, the Schrödinger equation, can actually be derived from classical physics, once the latter is considered anew, i.e. under said approach involving both particles and (Huygens) waves. In fact, the only difference to existing views is that Huygens waves are here considered to be real, physically effective waves in some hypothesized sub‐quantum medium, rather than mere formal tools. Originality/value What is particularly new in the present paper is that quantum systems can be described by what Heinz von Foerster has called “nontrivial machines”, whereas the corresponding classical counterparts turn out to behave as “trivial machines”. This should provide enough stimulus for discussing system theoretical issues also in the context of the foundations of quantum theory.