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:2310.06954 · Entropy

Bild Conception of Scientific Theory Structuring in Classical and Quantum Physics: From Hertz and Boltzmann to Schrödinger and De Broglie

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

Published Nov 20, 2023• 4 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

We start with a methodological analysis of the notion of scientific theory and its interrelation with reality. This analysis is based on the works of Helmholtz, Hertz, Boltzmann, and Schrödinger (and reviews of D'Agostino). Following Helmholtz, Hertz established the "Bild conception" for scientific theories. Here, "Bild" ("picture") carries the meaning "model" (mathematical). The main aim of natural sciences is construction of the causal theoretical models (CTMs) of natural phenomena. Hertz claimed that a CTM cannot be designed solely on the basis of observational data; it typically contains hidden quantities. Experimental data can be described by an observational model (OM), often based on the price of acausality. CTM-OM interrelation can be tricky. Schrödinger used the Bild concept to create a CTM for quantum mechanics (QM), and QM was treated as OM. We follow him and suggest a special CTM for QM, so-called prequantum classical statistical field theory (PCSFT). QM can be considered as a PCSFT image, but not as straightforward as in Bell's model with hidden variables. The common interpretation of the violation of the Bell inequality is criticized from the perspective of the two-level structuring of scientific theories. Such critical analysis of von Neumann and Bell no-go theorems for hidden variables was performed already by De Broglie (and Lochak) in the 1970s. The Bild approach is applied to the two-level CTM-OM modeling of Brownian motion: the overdamped regime corresponds to OM. In classical mechanics, CTM=OM; on the one hand, this is very convenient; on the other hand, this exceptional coincidence blurred the general CTM-OM structuring of scientific theories. We briefly discuss ontic-epistemic structuring of scientific theories (Primas-Atmanspacher) and its relation to the Bild concept. Interestingly, Atmanspacher as well as Hertz claim that even classical physical theories should be presented on the basic of two-level structuring.

DOI
10.3390/e25111565

Related papers

Bild Conception for Scientific Theory

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

In this chapter we start with methodological analysis of the notion of scientifictheory and its interrelation with reality. This analysis is based onthe works of Helmholtz, Hertz, Boltzmann, and Schrödinger (and reviewsof D’ Agostino). Following Helmholtz, Hertz established the “Bild concept”for scientific theories. Here “Bild” (“picture”) carries the meaning “model”(mathematical). The main aim of natural sciences is construction of thecausal theoretical models (CTMs) of natural phenomena. Hertz claimed thatCTM cannot be designed solely on the basis of observational data; it typicallycontains hidden quantities. Experimental data can be described by anobservational model (OM), often at the price of acausality. CTM-OM interrelationcan be tricky. Schrödinger used the Bild concept to create CTM forquantum mechanics (QM) and QM was treated as OM. We follow him andsuggest a special CTM for QM, the so-called prequantum classical statisticalfield theory (PCSFT). QM can be considered as a PCSFT-image, but notas straightforward as in Bell’s model with hidden variables. The commoninterpretation of the violation of the Bell inequality is criticized from theperspective of the two-level structuring of scientific theories.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Nov 28, 2024•0 citations

Hertz’s Viewpoint on Quantum Theory

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

In the nineteenth century (in the process of transition from mechanics to the field theory), the German school of theoretical physics confronted problems similar to the basic problems in the foundations of quantum mechanics (QM). Hertz tried to resolve such problem through analysis of the notion of a scientific theory and interrelation of theory and experiment. This analysis led him to the Bild (image) conception of theory (which was later essentially developed, but also modified by Boltzmann). In this paper, we claim that to resolve the basic foundational problems of QM, one has to use the Bild conception and reject the observational viewpoint on physical theory. As an example of a Bild theory underlying QM (treated as an observational theory), we consider prequantum classical statistical field theory (PCSFT): theory of random subquantum fields.

arXiv:1807.06409•Activitas Nervosa Superior•Apr 27, 2019•15 citations

From principles of mechanics to quantum mechanics - a survey on fuzziness in scientific theories

Rudolf Seising

In this paper we discuss the principles of two fundamental theories of physics: mechanics and quantum mechanics. First, we consider two philosophical positions of the German physicist Heinrich Hertz. He established one of the both in the introduction of his well known Principles of Mechanics. This view - Hertz's "picture" concept - which has a long tradition in philosophy, particularly with regard to physics and later to other empirical sciences, serves as the starting point of an interpretation of the relationship between real systems and theoretical structures of modern science using the concept of fuzziness. This "fuzzy view" on philosophy of science gives particularly an interpretation of Hertz's earlier lecture on The Constitution of matter. Second we consider some principles of quantum mechanics, particularly Werner Heisenberg's uncertainty relation of subatomic object's position and momentum, and Max Born's probabilistic interpretation of the quantum mechanical wave function. These principles are parts of the so-called Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. Third, we argue that the "fuzzy approach" is fruitful for a "fuzzy" interpretation of quantum mechanics because fuzziness fills the gap between systems and phenomena in reality and the scientific theory of quantum mechanics - as every other scientific theory.

Annual Meeting of the North American Fuzzy Information Processing Society (NAFIPS)•May 1, 2008•8 citations

The Quantum Mechanical Formalism Derived from the Probabilistic Nature of Quantitative Physical Predictions

Hans Rudolf Tschudi

It is a scientific truism nowadays that quantum mechanical predictions are of statistical or rather of probabilistic nature: a quantum theory assigns a probability distribution to each measurable quantity (observable) of a physical system prepared according to a given preparation prescription (state). Such sets of probability distributions represent the most general quantitative predictions of physical theories. The aim of this study is to determine all theoretical frameworks which yield such a kind of output taking the probabilistic nature of quantitative physical predictions as initial hypothesis. Astonishingly, this project succeeds with a minimal number of additional assumptions, which arise quite naturally in the course of the analysis, and which essentially amount to regularity conditions. The result is that there exist only two classes of physical theories providing quantitative probabilistic predictions: classical theories where observables are represented by real functions over a phase space and states are represented by probability measures upon the phase space, and quantum theories where observables are represented by selfadjoint operators acting on a complex Hilbert space and states are represented by state operators. On empirical grounds, classical theories cannot provide the all-encompassing, fundamental frame for the mathematical description of physical systems. Quantum theories remain, and there is no more complete formal frame for quantitative physical theories. As an additional result, it is shown that there exist physical systems which possess a quantum mechanical but no classical description; a prominent example is the spin system of two spin-1/2 particles. The classical hidden variables model, which J. Bell relates to this system in order to prove his theorem, cannot be a true description of it because no such classical model exists, and Bell's theorem loses its foundation.

•Mar 5, 2026•0 citations

Prequantum Classical Statistical Field Theory (PCSFT)

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

This chapter presents the basics of the mathematical formalism and methodologyof the prequantum classical statistical field theory (PCSFT). In theBild-conception framework, PCSFT gives an example of acausal theoretical model (CTM) beyond QM, considered as observationalmodel (OM). Generally CTM-OM correspondence is not as straightforwardas in Bell’s model with hidden variables. In PCSFT hidden variables are randomfields fluctuating at spatial and temporal scales which are essentiallyfiner than those approached by the present measurement technology. Thekey element of the PCSFT-QM correspondence is mapping of the complexcovariance operator of a subquantum random field to the density operator.For compound systems, the situation is more complicated. Here PCSFT providestwo descriptions of compound systems with random fields valued intensor vs. Cartesian product of the Hilbert spaces of subsystems. The lattermodel matches representation of compound systems in classical statisticalmechanics. Both approaches are used for measure-theoretic representationof the correlations violating the Bell inequalities.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Nov 28, 2024•0 citations

Reality without Realism vs Bild Conception as Complementary Approaches to Scientific Realism

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

The interpretation of quantum mechanics remains one of the most challenging problems in the philosophy of science, particularly regarding the relationship between scientific theories and reality. In this section we compare two significant conceptual frameworks that address these challenges: RWR interpretation and the Bild conception of scientific theory structuring. Both approaches offer sophisticated alternatives to traditional realist interpretations while maintaining scientific rigor and explanatory power.

Epistemology & Philosophy of Science•Jan 1, 2025•0 citations
We start with a methodological analysis of the notion of scientific theory and its interrelation with reality. This analysis is based on the works of Helmholtz, Hertz, Boltzmann, and Schrödinger (and reviews of D'Agostino). Following Helmholtz, Hertz established the "Bild conception" for scientific theories. Here, "Bild" ("picture") carries the meaning "model" (mathematical). The main aim of natural sciences is construction of the causal theoretical models (CTMs) of natural phenomena. Hertz claimed that a CTM cannot be designed solely on the basis of observational data; it typically contains hidden quantities. Experimental data can be described by an observational model (OM), often based on the price of acausality. CTM-OM interrelation can be tricky. Schrödinger used the Bild concept to create a CTM for quantum mechanics (QM), and QM was treated as OM. We follow him and suggest a special CTM for QM, so-called prequantum classical statistical field theory (PCSFT). QM can be considered as a PCSFT image, but not as straightforward as in Bell's model with hidden variables. The common interpretation of the violation of the Bell inequality is criticized from the perspective of the two-level structuring of scientific theories. Such critical analysis of von Neumann and Bell no-go theorems for hidden variables was performed already by De Broglie (and Lochak) in the 1970s. The Bild approach is applied to the two-level CTM-OM modeling of Brownian motion: the overdamped regime corresponds to OM. In classical mechanics, CTM=OM; on the one hand, this is very convenient; on the other hand, this exceptional coincidence blurred the general CTM-OM structuring of scientific theories. We briefly discuss ontic-epistemic structuring of scientific theories (Primas-Atmanspacher) and its relation to the Bild concept. Interestingly, Atmanspacher as well as Hertz claim that even classical physical theories should be presented on the basic of two-level structuring.
In this chapter we start with methodological analysis of the notion of scientifictheory and its interrelation with reality. This analysis is based onthe works of Helmholtz, Hertz, Boltzmann, and Schrödinger (and reviewsof D’ Agostino). Following Helmholtz, Hertz established the “Bild concept”for scientific theories. Here “Bild” (“picture”) carries the meaning “model”(mathematical). The main aim of natural sciences is construction of thecausal theoretical models (CTMs) of natural phenomena. Hertz claimed thatCTM cannot be designed solely on the basis of observational data; it typicallycontains hidden quantities. Experimental data can be described by anobservational model (OM), often at the price of acausality. CTM-OM interrelationcan be tricky. Schrödinger used the Bild concept to create CTM forquantum mechanics (QM) and QM was treated as OM. We follow him andsuggest a special CTM for QM, the so-called prequantum classical statisticalfield theory (PCSFT). QM can be considered as a PCSFT-image, but notas straightforward as in Bell’s model with hidden variables. The commoninterpretation of the violation of the Bell inequality is criticized from theperspective of the two-level structuring of scientific theories.
In the nineteenth century (in the process of transition from mechanics to the field theory), the German school of theoretical physics confronted problems similar to the basic problems in the foundations of quantum mechanics (QM). Hertz tried to resolve such problem through analysis of the notion of a scientific theory and interrelation of theory and experiment. This analysis led him to the Bild (image) conception of theory (which was later essentially developed, but also modified by Boltzmann). In this paper, we claim that to resolve the basic foundational problems of QM, one has to use the Bild conception and reject the observational viewpoint on physical theory. As an example of a Bild theory underlying QM (treated as an observational theory), we consider prequantum classical statistical field theory (PCSFT): theory of random subquantum fields.
In this paper we discuss the principles of two fundamental theories of physics: mechanics and quantum mechanics. First, we consider two philosophical positions of the German physicist Heinrich Hertz. He established one of the both in the introduction of his well known Principles of Mechanics. This view - Hertz's "picture" concept - which has a long tradition in philosophy, particularly with regard to physics and later to other empirical sciences, serves as the starting point of an interpretation of the relationship between real systems and theoretical structures of modern science using the concept of fuzziness. This "fuzzy view" on philosophy of science gives particularly an interpretation of Hertz's earlier lecture on The Constitution of matter. Second we consider some principles of quantum mechanics, particularly Werner Heisenberg's uncertainty relation of subatomic object's position and momentum, and Max Born's probabilistic interpretation of the quantum mechanical wave function. These principles are parts of the so-called Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. Third, we argue that the "fuzzy approach" is fruitful for a "fuzzy" interpretation of quantum mechanics because fuzziness fills the gap between systems and phenomena in reality and the scientific theory of quantum mechanics - as every other scientific theory.
It is a scientific truism nowadays that quantum mechanical predictions are of statistical or rather of probabilistic nature: a quantum theory assigns a probability distribution to each measurable quantity (observable) of a physical system prepared according to a given preparation prescription (state). Such sets of probability distributions represent the most general quantitative predictions of physical theories. The aim of this study is to determine all theoretical frameworks which yield such a kind of output taking the probabilistic nature of quantitative physical predictions as initial hypothesis. Astonishingly, this project succeeds with a minimal number of additional assumptions, which arise quite naturally in the course of the analysis, and which essentially amount to regularity conditions. The result is that there exist only two classes of physical theories providing quantitative probabilistic predictions: classical theories where observables are represented by real functions over a phase space and states are represented by probability measures upon the phase space, and quantum theories where observables are represented by selfadjoint operators acting on a complex Hilbert space and states are represented by state operators. On empirical grounds, classical theories cannot provide the all-encompassing, fundamental frame for the mathematical description of physical systems. Quantum theories remain, and there is no more complete formal frame for quantitative physical theories. As an additional result, it is shown that there exist physical systems which possess a quantum mechanical but no classical description; a prominent example is the spin system of two spin-1/2 particles. The classical hidden variables model, which J. Bell relates to this system in order to prove his theorem, cannot be a true description of it because no such classical model exists, and Bell's theorem loses its foundation.
This chapter presents the basics of the mathematical formalism and methodologyof the prequantum classical statistical field theory (PCSFT). In theBild-conception framework, PCSFT gives an example of acausal theoretical model (CTM) beyond QM, considered as observationalmodel (OM). Generally CTM-OM correspondence is not as straightforwardas in Bell’s model with hidden variables. In PCSFT hidden variables are randomfields fluctuating at spatial and temporal scales which are essentiallyfiner than those approached by the present measurement technology. Thekey element of the PCSFT-QM correspondence is mapping of the complexcovariance operator of a subquantum random field to the density operator.For compound systems, the situation is more complicated. Here PCSFT providestwo descriptions of compound systems with random fields valued intensor vs. Cartesian product of the Hilbert spaces of subsystems. The lattermodel matches representation of compound systems in classical statisticalmechanics. Both approaches are used for measure-theoretic representationof the correlations violating the Bell inequalities.
The interpretation of quantum mechanics remains one of the most challenging problems in the philosophy of science, particularly regarding the relationship between scientific theories and reality. In this section we compare two significant conceptual frameworks that address these challenges: RWR interpretation and the Bild conception of scientific theory structuring. Both approaches offer sophisticated alternatives to traditional realist interpretations while maintaining scientific rigor and explanatory power.