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:2203.14052

On a foundational conceptual principle of quantum mechanics

Laurent, Frederique, François-Igor Pris

Published Mar 26, 2022• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

We argue that Anton Zeilinger's "foundational conceptual principle" for quantum mechanics according to which an elementary system carries one bit of information is an idealistic principle, which should be replaced by a realistic principle of contextuality. Specific properties of quantum systems are a consequence of impossibility to speak about them without reference to the tools of their observation (identification) and, consequently, context in which these tools are applied. In particular, the assumption of non-locality is not required to explain quantum correlation. Correlated quantum events are related with each other in a causal way. But this is not classical, but quantum causality expressed by an entangled wave function. This or that particular correlation does not arise in measurement; in measurement it is identified in context. In contrast to Zeilinger's proposed principle of quantization of information, the principle of contextuality explains it realistically.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2203.14052

Related papers

On idealism of Anton Zeilinger's information interpretation of quantum mechanics

François-Igor Pris

We argue that Anton Zeilinger's "foundational conceptual principle" for quantum mechanics according to which an elementary system carries one bit of information is an idealistic principle, which should be replaced by a realistic principle of contextuality. Specific properties of quantum systems are a consequence of impossibility to speak about them without reference to the tools of their observation/identification and, consequently, context in which these tools are applied.

arXiv:2109.07811•Sep 16, 2021•0 citations

Realism and Antirealism in Informational Foundations of Quantum Theory

Tina Bilban

Zeilinger-Brukner's informational foundations of quantum theory, a theory based on Zeilinger's foundational principle for quantum mechanics that an elementary system carried one bit of information, explains seemingly unintuitive quantum behavior with simple theoretical framework. It is based on the notion that distinction between reality and information cannot be made, therefore they are the same. As the critics of informational foundations of quantum theory show, this antirealistic move captures the theory in tautology, where information only refers to itself, while the relationships outside the information with the help of which the nature of information would be defined are lost and the questions "Whose information? Information about what?" cannot be answered. The critic's solution is a return to realism, where the observer's effects on the information are neglected. We show that radical antirealism of informational foundations of quantum theory is not necessary and that the return to realism is not the only way forward. A comprehensive approach that exceeds mere realism and antirealism is also possible: we can consider both sources of the constraints on the information, those coming from the observer and those coming from the observed system/nature/reality. The information is always the observer's information about the observed. Such a comprehensive philosophical approach can still support the theoretical framework of informational foundations of quantum theory: If we take that one bit is the smallest amount of information in the form of which the observed reality can be grasped by the observer, we can say that an elementary system (grasped and defined as such by the observer) correlates to one bit of information. Our approach thus explains all the features of the quantum behavior explained by informational foundations of quantum theory: the wave function and its collapse, entanglement, complementarity and quantum randomness. However, it does so in a more comprehensive and intuitive way. The presented approach is close to Husserl's explanation of the relationship between reality and the knowledge we have about it, and to Bohr's personal explanation of quantum mechanics, the complexity of which has often been missed and simplified to mere antirealism. Our approach thus reconnects phenomenology with contemporary philosophy of science and introduces the comprehensive approach that exceeds mere realism and antirealism to the field of quantum theories with informational foundations, where such an approach has not been taken before. Quanta 2014; 3: 32–42.

Quanta•Aug 23, 2014•3 citations

Causation does not explain contextuality

Sally Shrapnel, Fabio Costa

Realist interpretations of quantum mechanics presuppose the existence of elements of reality that are independent of the actions used to reveal them. Such a view is challenged by several no-go theorems that show quantum correlations cannot be explained by non-contextual ontological models, where physical properties are assumed to exist prior to and independently of the act of measurement. However, all such contextuality proofs assume a traditional notion of causal structure, where causal influence flows from past to future according to ordinary dynamical laws. This leaves open the question of whether the apparent contextuality of quantum mechanics is simply the signature of some exotic causal structure, where the future might affect the past or distant systems might get correlated due to non-local constraints. Here we show that quantum predictions require a deeper form of contextuality: even allowing for arbitrary causal structure, no model can explain quantum correlations from non-contextual ontological properties of the world, be they initial states, dynamical laws, or global constraints.

arXiv:1708.00137•Quantum•May 18, 2018•30 citations

Quantum nonlocality and contextuality as fine-tuning

Eric G. Cavalcanti

Nonlocality and contextuality are at the root of conceptual puzzles in quantum mechanics, and are key resources for quantum advantage in information-processing tasks. Bell nonlocality is best understood as the incompatibility between quantum correlations and the classical theory of causality, applied to relativistic causal structure. Contextuality, on the other hand, is on a more controversial foundation. In this work, I provide a common conceptual ground between nonlocality and contextuality as violations of classical causality. First, I show that Bell inequalities can be derived solely from the assumptions of no-signalling and no-fine-tuning of the causal model. This removes two extra assumptions from a recent result from Wood and Spekkens, and remarkably, does not require any assumption related to independence of measurement settings -- unlike all other derivations of Bell inequalities. I then introduce a formalism to represent contextuality scenarios within causal models and show that all classical causal models for violations of a Kochen-Specker inequality require fine-tuning. Thus the quantum violation of classical causality goes beyond the case of space-like separated systems, and manifests already in scenarios involving single systems.

•May 17, 2017•1 citation

On Quantum Causality

Igor Evgenievich Pris

For Kant causality is an a priori category of the understanding, a necessary condition for the possibility of any experience. Later Wittgenstein’s philosophy rejects transcendentalism. We can only speak of causes and effects if in some basic situations, or ‘language games’, we already treat some things as causes of what happens. Since the notion of cause becomes meaningful only within a language game, it is not unambiguous. Quantum causal language games presuppose the use of quantum theory. We treat the latter as Wittgenstein’s grammar of a quantum form of life’, or rule (norm), anchored in its applications — quantum phenomena as language games. Quantum correlations are often interpreted as a manifestation of the nonlocality of quantum mechanics. This is a view of quantum phenomena from the perspective of classical physics. Our contextual point of view rejects the nonlocality of quantum theory in the sense of instantaneous causal influence at a distance. But it does not admit its locality in the sense of classical causality either. We introduce the notion of quantum causality which allows us to treat quantum correlations as local, but context-dependent. Their formal cause is an entangled wave function. Any particular quantum correlation, identifiable in a context of its observation as a result of the wave function reduction, post factum can be treated as a classical causal correlation. From the point of view of the proposed contextual quantum realism, epistemology is secondary, and ontology is sensitive to context. Quantum correlations exist (are real) before application of the theory, independently of their identification (description, measurement), but have no identity, which appears only as a result of application of the theory and their identification in the context. In other words, they are real, but not pre-determined, not autonomous.

Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University Philosophy and Conflict Studies•Jan 1, 2023•1 citation

Beyond Causal Explanation: Einstein’s Principle Not Reichenbach’s

Michael Silberstein, W. M. Stuckey, Timothy J. McDevitt

Our account provides a local, realist and fully non-causal principle explanation for EPR correlations, contextuality, no-signalling, and the Tsirelson bound. Indeed, the account herein is fully consistent with the causal structure of Minkowski spacetime. We argue that retrocausal accounts of quantum mechanics are problematic precisely because they do not fully transcend the assumption that causal or constructive explanation must always be fundamental. Unlike retrocausal accounts, our principle explanation is a complete rejection of Reichenbach's Principle. Furthermore, we will argue that the basis for our principle account of quantum mechanics is the physical principle sought by quantum information theorists for their reconstructions of quantum mechanics. Finally, we explain why our account is both fully realist and psi-epistemic.

Entropy•Jan 16, 2021•20 citations
We argue that Anton Zeilinger's "foundational conceptual principle" for quantum mechanics according to which an elementary system carries one bit of information is an idealistic principle, which should be replaced by a realistic principle of contextuality. Specific properties of quantum systems are a consequence of impossibility to speak about them without reference to the tools of their observation (identification) and, consequently, context in which these tools are applied. In particular, the assumption of non-locality is not required to explain quantum correlation. Correlated quantum events are related with each other in a causal way. But this is not classical, but quantum causality expressed by an entangled wave function. This or that particular correlation does not arise in measurement; in measurement it is identified in context. In contrast to Zeilinger's proposed principle of quantization of information, the principle of contextuality explains it realistically.
Zeilinger-Brukner's informational foundations of quantum theory, a theory based on Zeilinger's foundational principle for quantum mechanics that an elementary system carried one bit of information, explains seemingly unintuitive quantum behavior with simple theoretical framework. It is based on the notion that distinction between reality and information cannot be made, therefore they are the same. As the critics of informational foundations of quantum theory show, this antirealistic move captures the theory in tautology, where information only refers to itself, while the relationships outside the information with the help of which the nature of information would be defined are lost and the questions "Whose information? Information about what?" cannot be answered. The critic's solution is a return to realism, where the observer's effects on the information are neglected. We show that radical antirealism of informational foundations of quantum theory is not necessary and that the return to realism is not the only way forward. A comprehensive approach that exceeds mere realism and antirealism is also possible: we can consider both sources of the constraints on the information, those coming from the observer and those coming from the observed system/nature/reality. The information is always the observer's information about the observed. Such a comprehensive philosophical approach can still support the theoretical framework of informational foundations of quantum theory: If we take that one bit is the smallest amount of information in the form of which the observed reality can be grasped by the observer, we can say that an elementary system (grasped and defined as such by the observer) correlates to one bit of information. Our approach thus explains all the features of the quantum behavior explained by informational foundations of quantum theory: the wave function and its collapse, entanglement, complementarity and quantum randomness. However, it does so in a more comprehensive and intuitive way. The presented approach is close to Husserl's explanation of the relationship between reality and the knowledge we have about it, and to Bohr's personal explanation of quantum mechanics, the complexity of which has often been missed and simplified to mere antirealism. Our approach thus reconnects phenomenology with contemporary philosophy of science and introduces the comprehensive approach that exceeds mere realism and antirealism to the field of quantum theories with informational foundations, where such an approach has not been taken before. Quanta 2014; 3: 32–42.
Realist interpretations of quantum mechanics presuppose the existence of elements of reality that are independent of the actions used to reveal them. Such a view is challenged by several no-go theorems that show quantum correlations cannot be explained by non-contextual ontological models, where physical properties are assumed to exist prior to and independently of the act of measurement. However, all such contextuality proofs assume a traditional notion of causal structure, where causal influence flows from past to future according to ordinary dynamical laws. This leaves open the question of whether the apparent contextuality of quantum mechanics is simply the signature of some exotic causal structure, where the future might affect the past or distant systems might get correlated due to non-local constraints. Here we show that quantum predictions require a deeper form of contextuality: even allowing for arbitrary causal structure, no model can explain quantum correlations from non-contextual ontological properties of the world, be they initial states, dynamical laws, or global constraints.
Nonlocality and contextuality are at the root of conceptual puzzles in quantum mechanics, and are key resources for quantum advantage in information-processing tasks. Bell nonlocality is best understood as the incompatibility between quantum correlations and the classical theory of causality, applied to relativistic causal structure. Contextuality, on the other hand, is on a more controversial foundation. In this work, I provide a common conceptual ground between nonlocality and contextuality as violations of classical causality. First, I show that Bell inequalities can be derived solely from the assumptions of no-signalling and no-fine-tuning of the causal model. This removes two extra assumptions from a recent result from Wood and Spekkens, and remarkably, does not require any assumption related to independence of measurement settings -- unlike all other derivations of Bell inequalities. I then introduce a formalism to represent contextuality scenarios within causal models and show that all classical causal models for violations of a Kochen-Specker inequality require fine-tuning. Thus the quantum violation of classical causality goes beyond the case of space-like separated systems, and manifests already in scenarios involving single systems.
For Kant causality is an a priori category of the understanding, a necessary condition for the possibility of any experience. Later Wittgenstein’s philosophy rejects transcendentalism. We can only speak of causes and effects if in some basic situations, or ‘language games’, we already treat some things as causes of what happens. Since the notion of cause becomes meaningful only within a language game, it is not unambiguous. Quantum causal language games presuppose the use of quantum theory. We treat the latter as Wittgenstein’s grammar of a quantum form of life’, or rule (norm), anchored in its applications — quantum phenomena as language games. Quantum correlations are often interpreted as a manifestation of the nonlocality of quantum mechanics. This is a view of quantum phenomena from the perspective of classical physics. Our contextual point of view rejects the nonlocality of quantum theory in the sense of instantaneous causal influence at a distance. But it does not admit its locality in the sense of classical causality either. We introduce the notion of quantum causality which allows us to treat quantum correlations as local, but context-dependent. Their formal cause is an entangled wave function. Any particular quantum correlation, identifiable in a context of its observation as a result of the wave function reduction, post factum can be treated as a classical causal correlation. From the point of view of the proposed contextual quantum realism, epistemology is secondary, and ontology is sensitive to context. Quantum correlations exist (are real) before application of the theory, independently of their identification (description, measurement), but have no identity, which appears only as a result of application of the theory and their identification in the context. In other words, they are real, but not pre-determined, not autonomous.
Our account provides a local, realist and fully non-causal principle explanation for EPR correlations, contextuality, no-signalling, and the Tsirelson bound. Indeed, the account herein is fully consistent with the causal structure of Minkowski spacetime. We argue that retrocausal accounts of quantum mechanics are problematic precisely because they do not fully transcend the assumption that causal or constructive explanation must always be fundamental. Unlike retrocausal accounts, our principle explanation is a complete rejection of Reichenbach's Principle. Furthermore, we will argue that the basis for our principle account of quantum mechanics is the physical principle sought by quantum information theorists for their reconstructions of quantum mechanics. Finally, we explain why our account is both fully realist and psi-epistemic.