What if the paradoxical nature of quantum theory could find its source in some undecidability analog to that of Gödel's incompleteness theorem ? This essay aims at arguing for such Gödelian hunch via two case studies. Firstly, using a narrative based on the Newcomb problem, the theological motivational origin of quantum contextuality is introduced in order to show how this result might be related to a Liar-like undecidability. A topological generalization of contextuality by Abramsky et al. in which the logical structure of quantum contextuality is compared with "Liar cycles" is also presented. Secondly, the measurement problem is analyzed as emerging from a logical error. A personal analysis of the related Wigner's friend thought experiment and and a recent paradox by Frauchiger and Renner is presented, by introducing the notion of "meta-contextuality" as a Liar-like feature underlying the neo-Copenhagen interpretations of quantum theory. Finally, this quantum Gödelian hunch opens a discussion of the paradoxical nature of quantum physics and the emergence of time itself from self-contradiction.
What if the paradoxical nature of quantum theory could find its source in some undecidability analog to that of Gödel's incompleteness theorem ? This essay aims at arguing for such Gödelian hunch via two case studies. Firstly, using a narrative based on the Newcomb problem, the theological motivational origin of quantum contextuality is introduced in order to show how this result might be related to a Liar-like undecidability. A topological generalization of contextuality by Abramsky et al. in which the logical structure of quantum contextuality is compared with "Liar cycles" is also presented. Secondly, the measurement problem is analyzed as emerging from a logical error. A personal analysis of the related Wigner's friend thought experiment and and a recent paradox by Frauchiger and Renner is presented, by introducing the notion of "meta-contextuality" as a Liar-like feature underlying the neo-Copenhagen interpretations of quantum theory. Finally, this quantum Gödelian hunch opens a discussion of the paradoxical nature of quantum physics and the emergence of time itself from self-contradiction.
This paper offers a comprehensive analysis of Wigner’s Friend paradox (1961), a foundational thought experiment in quantum mechanics that highlights the tension between the internal perspective of a measuring observer (who experiences a definite outcome) and the external perspective of a super-observer who treats the entire laboratory as a quantum system in superposition. It traces the historical lineage from Schrödinger’s cat and von Neumann’s measurement theory, provides a formal mathematical description of the state evolution and logical structure of the paradox, examines implications for major interpretations of quantum mechanics (Copenhagen, Everettian many-worlds, QBism, relational quantum mechanics, and objective collapse theories), and discusses modern extensions such as the Frauchiger–Renner paradox. The work explores profound philosophical and epistemological consequences for the nature of observation, objectivity, intersubjectivity, and the role of consciousness in quantum theory (2026).
Quantum mechanics has been subject to logical scrutiny since its inception. The behavior of quantum systems, which are fundamentally dissimilar from classical systems, often appears to point to a logical inconsistency in quantum mechanics, allegedly leading to contradictions in the prediction of experimental measurements--though such contradictions have never materialized. A recent example of this type of inquiry into the logical well-posedness of quantum mechanics is the Frauchiger-Renner Gedankenexperiment, which purports to demonstrate that quantum mechanics is logically inconsistent. In this article, we show that by considering the property of contextuality in quantum systems--as predicted by the Kochen-Specker theorem--the supposed contradiction proposed by Frauchiger and Renner becomes logically inaccessible.
This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the Frauchiger–Renner paradox (2018), a significant thought experiment that demonstrates a logical contradiction arising when standard quantum mechanics is applied to nested observers. Building on Wigner’s friend scenario, it examines the formal setup, derives the contradiction from assumptions of universality, the Born rule, and self-consistency in multi-agent reasoning, and evaluates proposed resolutions across major interpretations of quantum mechanics (Copenhagen, Everettian/many-worlds, relational, QBism, decoherent histories, and objective collapse theories). The work explores historical context, epistemological implications for observation, objectivity, and intersubjectivity, as well as recent experimental probes and theoretical refinements. It argues that the paradox reveals deep tensions in applying quantum theory to complex, self-referential scenarios involving observers (2026).
Despite its remarkable empirical success and predictive power, quantum theory is riddled with mysteries. One such conceptual puzzle is the measurement problem: why do quantum systems in superposition collapse to a single-valued outcome upon being measured? The scenario of Wigner's friend illustrates this tension, with recent extensions deriving strong no-go results for the nature of reality. Another fundamental puzzle arises at the interface of quantum theory and general relativity---the black hole information paradox. This thesis further explores these two foundational paradoxes. Part I of this thesis focuses on extensions of the Wigner's friend scenario. We introduce several novel extended Wigner's friend arguments, and establish connections with notions of nonclassicality, i.e. the study of quantum phenomena that evade classical explanation. Key results are a refined version of the Frauchiger--Renner paradox, new extended Wigner's friend scenarios based on contextuality, and an argument against the absoluteness of free choices based on the Pusey--Barrett--Rudolph theorem. The latter result complements the Local Friendliness no-go theorem, which challenged the absoluteness of experimentally obtained measurement outcomes. In Part II of this thesis, we turn to black hole puzzles and the interplay of quantum theory and gravity. We present a paradox that unifies extended Wigner's friend arguments with black hole puzzles, strengthening the cloning and firewall paradoxes. After discussing subtleties in these paradoxes, we next present an analysis combining elements of quantum theory with gravity, analyzing the detector response near a superposed black hole using elements of quantum reference frames.
The fundamental nature of causality has been challenged by quantum theory. In particular, recent developments have shown that by relaxing the standard assumption that quantum events are embedded in a fixed background causal structure, a new kind of causal relations, indefinite, can emerge. These indefinite causal structures have been interpreted as causal loops allowing for the violation of a form of causality without paradoxes. On the other hand, quantum contextuality shows that any attempt to extend quantum theory such that classical logic holds in the extended domain fails due to the rise of inconsistent logical loops. There has been increasing evidence that it is a key feature in the understanding quantum paradoxes. This thesis aims at improving our understanding of indefinite causal orders and quantum paradoxes in order to address the question: “Could the non-fundamental nature of causality be related to a form of contextuality ?”The process matrix formalism is a mathematical framework which, in analogy withentanglement and the violation of Bell inequalities (nonlocality), offers new tools - witnesses of causal nonseparability and the violation of causal inequalities with noncausalcorrelations - to study and identify indefinite causal orders. In a bottom-up approach, wehave identified a large class of physically implementable processes, the quantum circuitswith quantum control of causal order (QC-QCs), that includes causally nonseparable processes such as the celebrated “quantum switch”. However these circuits cannot be used to violate causal inequalities. Nevertheless, in another work, I have proposed a significant relaxation of assumptions to certify the causal nonseparability of many processes, showing that it can be done in a semi-device-independent scenario with untrusted local operations and trusted quantum inputs. In particular, I have shown that the quantum switch can generate noncausal correlations in this kind of scenario.In order to refine my understanding of quantum contextuality, I have investigated theorigins of the Kochen-Specker theorem and I have analysed how the Hardy paradox entails a form of logical contextuality. I have identified that the two possible intermediatemeasurements involved in a pre-post-selection version of the paradox differ causally fromeach other. This analysis might be useful to study of the Frauchiger-Renner paradox, a“meta-version” of the Hardy paradox. On a more metaphysical aspect, I have argued fora “Gödelian hunch” from quantum theory, the idea that quantum paradoxes emerge froma lack of distinction between theoretical and metatheoretical objects.Finally, in order to establish a link between indefinite causal orders and contextuality,I have proposed a new causal game, in which the grandfather paradox is formalized interms of a logical inequality. Some process matrices can violate the causal inequalitywithout violating the logical one. I suggest that the emergence of logical inconsistenciesfrom the violation of a logical inequality might be interpreted as a form of contextuality.
Contextuality is a key feature of quantum mechanics that provides an important non-classical resource for quantum information and computation. Abramsky and Brandenburger used sheaf theory to give a general treatment of contextuality in quantum theory [New Journal of Physics 13 (2011) 113036]. However, contextual phenomena are found in other fields as well, for example database theory. In this paper, we shall develop this unified view of contextuality. We provide two main contributions: firstly, we expose a remarkable connection between contexuality and logical paradoxes; secondly, we show that an important class of contextuality arguments has a topological origin. More specifically, we show that "All-vs-Nothing" proofs of contextuality are witnessed by cohomological obstructions.