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:1910.13158

Temporal interference of relativistic bosons

ANDRZEJ GÓŹDŹ, Marek Góźdź

Published Oct 29, 2019• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

In quantum mechanics, time is introduced as a non-measurable quantity, as there is no possibility to build a hermitian operator canonically conjugated to the Hamiltonian. We cannot have, therefore, the time operator, which means that the temporal structure of the evolution of quantum systems is ill-defined. We present an extension to the model, in which the time evolution is based on the projection postulate rather than the unitary operator. This approach is in agreement with all other aspects of quantum mechanics and allows to discuss time as an observable. Using this framework we present a description of the temporal double-slit experiment in which a~single particle interferes with itself from a different instant of time. Such behaviour has already been observed experimentally but lacked a consistent theoretical explanation.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1910.13158

Related papers

Projection evolution of quantum states

ANDRZEJ GÓŹDŹ, Marek Góźdź, Aleksandra Pȩdrak

We discuss the problem of time in quantum mechanics. In the traditional formulation time enters the model as a parameter, not an observable, which follows from the famous Pauli theorem. It is now known, that Pauli's assumptions were too strong and that by removing some of them time can be represented as a quantum observable. In this case, instead of the unitary time evolution, other operators which map the space of initial states into the space of final states at each step of the evolution can be used. This allows to treat time as a quantum observable in a consistent way. We present the projection evolution model and show how the traditional Schroedinger evolution can be obtained from it. We propose the form of the time operator which satisfies the energy-time uncertainty relation. As an example, we discuss the temporal version of the double-slit experiment.

•Oct 24, 2019•1 citation

Projection evolution of quantum states. Part I

ANDRZEJ GÓŹDŹ, Marek Góźdź, Aleksandra Pȩdrak

We discuss the problem of time in quantum mechanics. In the traditional formulation time enters the model as a parameter, not an observable, which follows from the famous Pauli theorem. It is now known, that Pauli's assumptions were too strong and that by removing some of them time can be represented as a quantum observable. In this case, instead of the unitary time evolution, other operators which map the space of initial states into the space of final states at each step of the evolution can be used. This allows to treat time as a quantum observable in a consistent way. We present the projection evolution model and show how the traditional Schroedinger evolution can be obtained from it. We propose the form of the time operator which satisfies the energy-time uncertainty relation. As an example, we discuss the temporal version of the double-slit experiment.

arXiv:1910.11198•Oct 24, 2019•1 citation

Temporal Evolution and the Fifth Postulate

M.S. Rogalski, Stuart B. Palmer

Quantum systems, described in terms of wave functions and Hermitian operators that are defined at any instant of time, should be capable of temporal evolution, and this is consistent with the first four Postulates. There is nothing in Postulate 1 to prevent us from considering state vectors Ψ( t ) which depend on time. A Hermitian operator  ( t ), representing a real observable A according to Postulate 2, depends on time either explicitly or through the position coordinate and conjugate momenta, following the correspondence rule introduced by Postulate 4.

CRC Press eBooks•Nov 5, 2020•0 citations

Delayed Choice Phenomena in the Projection Evolution Model

Marek Góźdź, Andrzej Góźdź, Krzysztof Lider

In the Schrödinger evolution of a quantum state time enters as a real parameter representing the coordinate. In a more consistent approach time should be defined as a quantum observable, with the evolution taking place in a four-dimensional spacetime. This is possible in the projection evolution model in which the wave function is defined in both space and time. This allows to construct the time operator and discuss the temporal structure of quantum processes. In this paper we discuss a photon travelling through a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, focusing the description on the temporal profile of the wave function. We show that in this approach the delayed-choice experiments can be explained by the temporal overlap of the photon and the devices in the interferometer.

quant-pharXiv:2604.26716•Apr 30, 2026•0 citations

Delayed-Choice Phenomena in the Projection Evolution Model

Marek Góźdź, ANDRZEJ GÓŹDŹ, Krzysztof Lider

In the Schrödinger evolution of a quantum state, time enters as a real parameter representing the coordinate. In a more consistent approach, time should be defined as a quantum observable, with the evolution taking place in a four-dimensional spacetime. This is possible in the projection evolution model in which the wave function is defined in both space and time. This allows to construct the time operator and discuss the temporal structure of the quantum processes. In this paper, we discuss a photon travelling through a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, focusing the description on the temporal profile of the wave function. We show that in this approach the delayed-choice experiments can be explained by the temporal overlap of the photon and the devices in the interferometer.

Entropy•Jun 6, 2026•0 citations

A Temporal Interpretation of Quantum Measurement (Revised and Clarified Formulation)

Roberto Carlos Moleirinho Batista

Abstract This article presents a revised and conceptually refined formulation of a previously proposed Temporal Interpretation of quantum measurement, explicitly addressing the physical nature of wavefunction collapse. While the original proposal emphasised relativistic aspects of momentum superpositions, the present work clarifies the interpretation within the standard formalism of quantum mechanics, without introducing new dynamics or experimental predictions. Unitary evolution is read as a process of differentiated phase accumulation between branches of a quantum state. In relativistic contexts, phase differentials can be structurally related to effective proper-time differentials, allowing the introduction of a notion of temporal compatibility that provides a physically grounded account of decoherence. When such differentials exceed a characteristic scale, interference between branches becomes operationally inaccessible, while global unitarity is preserved. The observer is treated as a physical system endowed with an irreversible proper time associated with macroscopic, entropic dynamics. Within this framework, collapse is explained as an emergent physical phenomenon arising from the irreversibility of the observer’s proper time, which prevents the reconstruction of phase coherence after an interaction. Collapse is therefore neither a fundamental dynamical mechanism nor an objective event in space-time, but a necessary consequence of temporal irreversibility in physical observers. This formulation sharpens the distinction between decoherence and collapse, preserves full consistency with the Born rule, and positions the Temporal Interpretation as a competing interpretative framework that provides a concrete physical explanation for the quantum–classical transition, improving and clarifying the original proposal. This version clarifies the operational status of the interaction time, refines Sections 5.3 and 5.4, and standardises references and editorial structure. No changes to the formalism or conclusions.

•Dec 26, 2025•0 citations
In quantum mechanics, time is introduced as a non-measurable quantity, as there is no possibility to build a hermitian operator canonically conjugated to the Hamiltonian. We cannot have, therefore, the time operator, which means that the temporal structure of the evolution of quantum systems is ill-defined. We present an extension to the model, in which the time evolution is based on the projection postulate rather than the unitary operator. This approach is in agreement with all other aspects of quantum mechanics and allows to discuss time as an observable. Using this framework we present a description of the temporal double-slit experiment in which a~single particle interferes with itself from a different instant of time. Such behaviour has already been observed experimentally but lacked a consistent theoretical explanation.
We discuss the problem of time in quantum mechanics. In the traditional formulation time enters the model as a parameter, not an observable, which follows from the famous Pauli theorem. It is now known, that Pauli's assumptions were too strong and that by removing some of them time can be represented as a quantum observable. In this case, instead of the unitary time evolution, other operators which map the space of initial states into the space of final states at each step of the evolution can be used. This allows to treat time as a quantum observable in a consistent way. We present the projection evolution model and show how the traditional Schroedinger evolution can be obtained from it. We propose the form of the time operator which satisfies the energy-time uncertainty relation. As an example, we discuss the temporal version of the double-slit experiment.
We discuss the problem of time in quantum mechanics. In the traditional formulation time enters the model as a parameter, not an observable, which follows from the famous Pauli theorem. It is now known, that Pauli's assumptions were too strong and that by removing some of them time can be represented as a quantum observable. In this case, instead of the unitary time evolution, other operators which map the space of initial states into the space of final states at each step of the evolution can be used. This allows to treat time as a quantum observable in a consistent way. We present the projection evolution model and show how the traditional Schroedinger evolution can be obtained from it. We propose the form of the time operator which satisfies the energy-time uncertainty relation. As an example, we discuss the temporal version of the double-slit experiment.
Quantum systems, described in terms of wave functions and Hermitian operators that are defined at any instant of time, should be capable of temporal evolution, and this is consistent with the first four Postulates. There is nothing in Postulate 1 to prevent us from considering state vectors Ψ( t ) which depend on time. A Hermitian operator  ( t ), representing a real observable A according to Postulate 2, depends on time either explicitly or through the position coordinate and conjugate momenta, following the correspondence rule introduced by Postulate 4.
In the Schrödinger evolution of a quantum state time enters as a real parameter representing the coordinate. In a more consistent approach time should be defined as a quantum observable, with the evolution taking place in a four-dimensional spacetime. This is possible in the projection evolution model in which the wave function is defined in both space and time. This allows to construct the time operator and discuss the temporal structure of quantum processes. In this paper we discuss a photon travelling through a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, focusing the description on the temporal profile of the wave function. We show that in this approach the delayed-choice experiments can be explained by the temporal overlap of the photon and the devices in the interferometer.
In the Schrödinger evolution of a quantum state, time enters as a real parameter representing the coordinate. In a more consistent approach, time should be defined as a quantum observable, with the evolution taking place in a four-dimensional spacetime. This is possible in the projection evolution model in which the wave function is defined in both space and time. This allows to construct the time operator and discuss the temporal structure of the quantum processes. In this paper, we discuss a photon travelling through a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, focusing the description on the temporal profile of the wave function. We show that in this approach the delayed-choice experiments can be explained by the temporal overlap of the photon and the devices in the interferometer.
Abstract This article presents a revised and conceptually refined formulation of a previously proposed Temporal Interpretation of quantum measurement, explicitly addressing the physical nature of wavefunction collapse. While the original proposal emphasised relativistic aspects of momentum superpositions, the present work clarifies the interpretation within the standard formalism of quantum mechanics, without introducing new dynamics or experimental predictions. Unitary evolution is read as a process of differentiated phase accumulation between branches of a quantum state. In relativistic contexts, phase differentials can be structurally related to effective proper-time differentials, allowing the introduction of a notion of temporal compatibility that provides a physically grounded account of decoherence. When such differentials exceed a characteristic scale, interference between branches becomes operationally inaccessible, while global unitarity is preserved. The observer is treated as a physical system endowed with an irreversible proper time associated with macroscopic, entropic dynamics. Within this framework, collapse is explained as an emergent physical phenomenon arising from the irreversibility of the observer’s proper time, which prevents the reconstruction of phase coherence after an interaction. Collapse is therefore neither a fundamental dynamical mechanism nor an objective event in space-time, but a necessary consequence of temporal irreversibility in physical observers. This formulation sharpens the distinction between decoherence and collapse, preserves full consistency with the Born rule, and positions the Temporal Interpretation as a competing interpretative framework that provides a concrete physical explanation for the quantum–classical transition, improving and clarifying the original proposal. This version clarifies the operational status of the interaction time, refines Sections 5.3 and 5.4, and standardises references and editorial structure. No changes to the formalism or conclusions.