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:2211.08325 · Foundations of Physics

The Point of Primitive Ontology

Dustin Lazarovici, Paula Reichert

Published Nov 9, 2022• 4 citations
arXivHTMLPDF
DOI
10.1007/s10701-022-00639-w

Related papers

Does the Primitive Ontology of GRW Rest on Shaky Ground?

Cristian Mariani

Synthese Library/Synthese library•Jan 1, 2022•4 citations

From the Measurement Problem to the Primitive Ontology Programme

Michael Esfeld

arXiv:1907.11058•Fundamental theories of physics•Oct 2, 2020•5 citations

Beables, Primitive Ontology and Beyond: How Theories Meet the World

Andréa Oldofredi

arXiv:2104.13859•Synthese Library/Synthese library•Jan 1, 2022•7 citations

Primitive ontology and quantum field theory

Vincent Lam

European Journal for Philosophy of Science•May 2, 2015•9 citations

The primitive ontology of quantum physics: Guidelines for an assessment of the proposals

Michaël Esfeld

arXiv:1406.0732•Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics•Jun 27, 2014•46 citations

On the Status of Primitive Ontology

Shan Gao

Spontaneous collapse theories provide a promising solution to the measurement problem. But they also introduce a number of problems of their own concerning dimensionality, vagueness, and locality. In response to these problems, advocates of collapse theories have proposed various accounts of the primitive ontology of collapse theories—postulated underlying entities governed by the collapse theory and underwriting our observations. The most prominent of these are a mass density distribution over three-dimensional space, and a set of discrete “flash” events at space-time points. My argument here is that these primitive ontologies are redundant, in the sense that the structures exhibited by the primitive ontologies that allow them to solve the problems facing spontaneous collapse theories are also present in the wave function. But redundancy is not nonexistence; indeed, the fact that the relevant structures are already there in the wave function shows that the mass density ontology and the flash ontology exist whether they are explicitly postulated or not. By the same token, there is no need to decide between a wave function ontology, a mass density ontology and a flash ontology.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Apr 20, 2018•7 citations
Spontaneous collapse theories provide a promising solution to the measurement problem. But they also introduce a number of problems of their own concerning dimensionality, vagueness, and locality. In response to these problems, advocates of collapse theories have proposed various accounts of the primitive ontology of collapse theories—postulated underlying entities governed by the collapse theory and underwriting our observations. The most prominent of these are a mass density distribution over three-dimensional space, and a set of discrete “flash” events at space-time points. My argument here is that these primitive ontologies are redundant, in the sense that the structures exhibited by the primitive ontologies that allow them to solve the problems facing spontaneous collapse theories are also present in the wave function. But redundancy is not nonexistence; indeed, the fact that the relevant structures are already there in the wave function shows that the mass density ontology and the flash ontology exist whether they are explicitly postulated or not. By the same token, there is no need to decide between a wave function ontology, a mass density ontology and a flash ontology.