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:1910.10020

Physics of quantum mechanics -- why are there phonons?

Ross Street

Published Sep 10, 2019• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The underlying physics of quantum mechanics has been discussed for decades without an agreed resolution to many questions. The measurement problem, wave function collapse and entangled states are mired in complexity and the difficulty of even agreeing on a definition of a measurement. This paper explores a completely different aspect of quantum mechanics, the physical mechanism for phonon quantization, to gain insights into quantum mechanics that may help address the broader questions.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1910.10020

Related papers

What quantum computers may tell us about quantum mechanics

Christopher R. Monroe

Quantum mechanics occupies a unique position in the history of science. It has survived all experimental tests to date, culminating with the most precise comparison of any measurement to any theory – a 1987 measurement of the electron's magnetic moment, or gyromagnetic ratio g e = 2.002 319 304 39 (Van Dyck et al. 1987), agreeing with QED theory to 12 digits. Despite this and other dramatic successes of quantum mechanics, its foundations are often questioned, owing to the glaring difficulties in reconciling quantum physics with the classical laws of physics that govern macroscopic bodies. If quantum mechanics is indeed a complete theory of nature, why does it not apply to everyday life? Even Richard Feynman (1982), a fierce defender of quantum mechanics, memorably stated that: We have always had a great deal of difficulty in understanding the world view that quantum mechanics represents … Okay, I still get nervous with it … It has not yet become obvious to me that there is no real problem. I cannot define the real problem, therefore I suspect there's no real problem, but I'm not sure there's no real problem. In the dawn of the twenty-first century, John A. Wheeler's big question “Why the quantum?” has returned to the forefront of physics with full steam. Advances in experimental physics are beginning to realize the same thought-experiments that proved helpful to Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrödinger, and the other founders of quantum mechanics.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Apr 22, 2004•1 citation

Does the quantum mechanical wave function exist?

Claus Kiefer

I address the question whether the wave function in quantum theory exists as a real (ontic) quantity or not. For this purpose, I discuss the essentials of the quantum formalism and emphasize the central role of the superposition principle. I then explain the measurement problem and discuss the process of decoherence. Finally, I address the special features that the quantization of gravity brings into the game. From all of this I conclude that the wave function really exists, that is, it is a real (ontic) feature of Nature.

arXiv:1908.04607•Philosophical Problems in Science (Zagadnienia Filozoficzne w Nauce)•Jul 30, 2019•0 citations

The physical construct of quantum mechanics

Street, Robert

The physical constructs underlying the properties of quantum mechanics are explored. Arguments are given that the particle wave function as well as photon and phonon quanta must derive from a more fundamental physical construct that has not yet been identified. An approach to identifying the construct is discussed and a specific construct is proposed and explained.

arXiv:1704.08113•Apr 21, 2017•0 citations

Resolution of the Quantum Measurement Problem Based on Entropy

John Joseph Winders

The measurement problem in quantum mechanics can be characterized as explaining the question of definite outcomes, where a measurement of a superposed quantum state only gives a single definite outcome. According to quantum mechanics, the wave function, ψ, defines the state of the system, while the Schrödinger equation is a linear superposition of states that evolves deterministically. When a measurement is made, the outcome always uncovers the physical system as being in a definite state, and the future evolution of the wave function is amended based on the state that was measured. This change is often referred to as the “collapse” of the wave function. The problem concerns the question of what and how the measurement affected the system and why this changed the wave function. This paper addresses the measurement problem by separating it into five separate questions that are resolved through linking measurements to an entropy transfer from the superposed state to the environment. The underlying premise is the wave function is descriptive and not prescriptive, and entropy—the metric of quantum uncertainty and uncertainty in general—is the fundamental property rather than the wave function.

•May 10, 2026•0 citations

Wherefore Quantum Mechanics?

S. P. Boughn

After the development of a self-consistent quantum formalism nearly a century ago, there ensued a quest to understand the often counterintuitive predictions of the theory. These endeavors invariably begin with the assumption of the "truth" of the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics and then proceed to investigate the theory's implications for the physical world. One of the outcomes has been endless discussions of the quantum measurement problem, wave/particle duality, the non-locality of entangled quantum states, Schroedinger's cat, and other philosophical conundrums. In this essay, I take the point of view that quantum mechanics is a mathematical model, a human invention, and rather than pondering what the theory implies about our world, I consider the transposed question: what is it about our world that leads us to a quantum mechanical model of it? One consequence is the realization that discrete quanta, the quantum of action in particular, leads to the wave nature and statistical behavior of matter rather than the other way around.

arXiv:1910.08069•Jan 1, 2019•0 citations

There is no spooky action-at-a-distance in quantum correlations: Resolution of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen nonlocality puzzle

C. S. Unnikrishnan

The long-standing puzzle of the nonlocal Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen correlations is resolved. The correct quantum mechanical correlations arise for the case of entangled particles when strict locality is assumed for the probability amplitudes instead of locality for probabilities. Locality of amplitudes implies that measurement on one particle does not collapse the companion particle to a definite state. Sixty five years ago, the most significant paper questioning a fundamental aspect of quantum phenomena was written by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen (EPR) [1]. They addressed the question whether the wave-function represented a complete description of reality in quantum mechanics, and argued that it didn’t. Bohr’s reply to this paper [2] was not sufficient to resolve the fundamental issues raised by EPR. Decades later, Bohm rephrased the EPR problem [3] in terms of particles correlated in their spin and this helped enormously in analyzing the problem with clarity. John Bell analyzed the EPR problem in the early sixties and established the Bell’s inequalities obeyed by

•Jan 1, 2008•0 citations
The underlying physics of quantum mechanics has been discussed for decades without an agreed resolution to many questions. The measurement problem, wave function collapse and entangled states are mired in complexity and the difficulty of even agreeing on a definition of a measurement. This paper explores a completely different aspect of quantum mechanics, the physical mechanism for phonon quantization, to gain insights into quantum mechanics that may help address the broader questions.
Quantum mechanics occupies a unique position in the history of science. It has survived all experimental tests to date, culminating with the most precise comparison of any measurement to any theory – a 1987 measurement of the electron's magnetic moment, or gyromagnetic ratio g e = 2.002 319 304 39 (Van Dyck et al. 1987), agreeing with QED theory to 12 digits. Despite this and other dramatic successes of quantum mechanics, its foundations are often questioned, owing to the glaring difficulties in reconciling quantum physics with the classical laws of physics that govern macroscopic bodies. If quantum mechanics is indeed a complete theory of nature, why does it not apply to everyday life? Even Richard Feynman (1982), a fierce defender of quantum mechanics, memorably stated that: We have always had a great deal of difficulty in understanding the world view that quantum mechanics represents … Okay, I still get nervous with it … It has not yet become obvious to me that there is no real problem. I cannot define the real problem, therefore I suspect there's no real problem, but I'm not sure there's no real problem. In the dawn of the twenty-first century, John A. Wheeler's big question “Why the quantum?” has returned to the forefront of physics with full steam. Advances in experimental physics are beginning to realize the same thought-experiments that proved helpful to Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrödinger, and the other founders of quantum mechanics.
I address the question whether the wave function in quantum theory exists as a real (ontic) quantity or not. For this purpose, I discuss the essentials of the quantum formalism and emphasize the central role of the superposition principle. I then explain the measurement problem and discuss the process of decoherence. Finally, I address the special features that the quantization of gravity brings into the game. From all of this I conclude that the wave function really exists, that is, it is a real (ontic) feature of Nature.
The measurement problem in quantum mechanics can be characterized as explaining the question of definite outcomes, where a measurement of a superposed quantum state only gives a single definite outcome. According to quantum mechanics, the wave function, ψ, defines the state of the system, while the Schrödinger equation is a linear superposition of states that evolves deterministically. When a measurement is made, the outcome always uncovers the physical system as being in a definite state, and the future evolution of the wave function is amended based on the state that was measured. This change is often referred to as the “collapse” of the wave function. The problem concerns the question of what and how the measurement affected the system and why this changed the wave function. This paper addresses the measurement problem by separating it into five separate questions that are resolved through linking measurements to an entropy transfer from the superposed state to the environment. The underlying premise is the wave function is descriptive and not prescriptive, and entropy—the metric of quantum uncertainty and uncertainty in general—is the fundamental property rather than the wave function.
After the development of a self-consistent quantum formalism nearly a century ago, there ensued a quest to understand the often counterintuitive predictions of the theory. These endeavors invariably begin with the assumption of the "truth" of the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics and then proceed to investigate the theory's implications for the physical world. One of the outcomes has been endless discussions of the quantum measurement problem, wave/particle duality, the non-locality of entangled quantum states, Schroedinger's cat, and other philosophical conundrums. In this essay, I take the point of view that quantum mechanics is a mathematical model, a human invention, and rather than pondering what the theory implies about our world, I consider the transposed question: what is it about our world that leads us to a quantum mechanical model of it? One consequence is the realization that discrete quanta, the quantum of action in particular, leads to the wave nature and statistical behavior of matter rather than the other way around.
The long-standing puzzle of the nonlocal Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen correlations is resolved. The correct quantum mechanical correlations arise for the case of entangled particles when strict locality is assumed for the probability amplitudes instead of locality for probabilities. Locality of amplitudes implies that measurement on one particle does not collapse the companion particle to a definite state. Sixty five years ago, the most significant paper questioning a fundamental aspect of quantum phenomena was written by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen (EPR) [1]. They addressed the question whether the wave-function represented a complete description of reality in quantum mechanics, and argued that it didn’t. Bohr’s reply to this paper [2] was not sufficient to resolve the fundamental issues raised by EPR. Decades later, Bohm rephrased the EPR problem [3] in terms of particles correlated in their spin and this helped enormously in analyzing the problem with clarity. John Bell analyzed the EPR problem in the early sixties and established the Bell’s inequalities obeyed by