I introduce a novel realistic, stochastic approach to quantum mechanics by extending the recently proposed grabit formalism \cite{braun_stochastic_2022} to two Twin Worlds. According to the picture developed, we live at the intersection of two worlds with identical stochastic laws of evolution. Our World is limited to that intersection, and only coincidence events from the two Twin Worlds, post-selected automatically by our restriction to the intersection, have physical reality in Our World. This fully reproduces standard non-relativistic quantum mechanics, including Born's rule and the violation of Bell's inequality. I derive the stochastic evolution equation in each Twin World that fully reproduces Schrödinger's equation for an arbitrary number of particles with arbitrary interactions, and demonstrate that hall-mark quantum effects such as tunnling are correctly reproduced.
I introduce a novel realistic, stochastic approach to quantum mechanics by extending the recently proposed grabit formalism \cite{braun_stochastic_2022} to two Twin Worlds. According to the picture developed, we live at the intersection of two worlds with identical stochastic laws of evolution. Our World is limited to that intersection, and only coincidence events from the two Twin Worlds, post-selected automatically by our restriction to the intersection, have physical reality in Our World. This fully reproduces standard non-relativistic quantum mechanics, including Born's rule and the violation of Bell's inequality. I derive the stochastic evolution equation in each Twin World that fully reproduces Schrödinger's equation for an arbitrary number of particles with arbitrary interactions, and demonstrate that hall-mark quantum effects such as tunnling are correctly reproduced.
A type of mechanics will be presented that possesses some distinctive properties. On the one hand, its physical description & rules of operation are readily comprehensible & intuitively clear. On the other, it fully satisfies all observable predictions of non-relativistic quantum mechanics. Within it, particles exist at points in space, follow continuous, piecewise differentiable paths, and their linear momentum is equal to their mass times their velocity along their path. Yet the probabilities for position and momentum, conditioned on the state of the particle's environment, follow the rules of quantum theory. Indeed, all observable consequences of quantum theory are satisfied; particles can be entangled, have intrinsic spin, this spin is not local to the particle, particle identity can effect probabilities, and so forth. All the rules of quantum mechanics are obeyed, and all arise in a straightforward fashion. After this is established, connections will be drawn out between this type of mechanics and other types of quantum worlds; those that obey Bohmian mechanics, stochastic mechanics, the many worlds interpretation, and physical collapse. In the final section, a relativistic version of the mechanics will be presented.
Quantum nonlocality is shown to be an artifact of the Copenhagen interpretation, in which each observed quantity has exactly one value at any instant. In reality, all physical systems obey quantum mechanics, which obeys no such rule. Locality is restored if observed and observer are both assumed to obey quantum mechanics, as in the many-worlds interpretation (MWI). Using the MWI, I show that the quantum side of Bell's inequality, generally believed nonlocal, is really due to a series of three measurements (not two as in the standard, oversimplified analysis), all three of which have only local effects. Thus, experiments confirming "nonlocality" are actually confirming the MWI. The mistaken interpretation of nonlocality experiments depends crucially on a question-begging version of the Born interpretation, which makes sense only in "collapse" versions of quantum theory, about the meaning of the modulus of the wave function, so I use the interpretation based on the MWI, namely that the wave function is a world density amplitude, not a probability amplitude. This view allows the Born interpretation to be derived directly from the Schrödinger equation, by applying the Schrödinger equation to both the observed and the observer.
Applications of quantum mechanics have led to many successful predictions and explanations of puzzling phenomena, and we now apply quantum mechanics to gain, process, and communicate information in novel ways. We can understand quantum mechanics by understanding how we have applied it. We should not seek agreement on the nature of the world it represents, because this theory does not itself represent the physical world (though its applications do help us to represent it better). When applied to a quantum state, quantum mechanics yields probabiities for physical events: both state and probability are objective--not because they represent elements of phyiscal reality, but because each exerts norrmative authority over the beliefs of anyone who accepts quantum mechanics and applies it relative to a physical situation they may (but need not) occupy. These events may be described by statements that are meaningful in an appropriate environmental context, and quantum mechanics can help one to say when that is. Measurement creates an appropriate context, so here the Born rule indirectly yields probabilities of measurement outcomes. The quantum state of a system does not "collapse" on measurement: a new state must be assigned relative to a physical situation in which information about the outcome is accessible. Understood this way, there is no measurement problem, and violations of Bell inequalities does not demonstrate "spooky" non-local action. Quantum field theories have no physical ontology of their own: a quantum field is a mathematical object in a model whose application helps us to improve and extend our descriptions of the world in other terms. We cannot realise the scenario of Wigner's friend and its recent extensions: but the data that provide overwhelming evidence for quantum mechanics are objective in the same sense as the relative measurement outcomes described in those scenarios.
Applications of quantum mechanics have led to many successful predictions and explanations of puzzling phenomena, and we now apply quantum mechanics to gain, process, and communicate information in novel ways. We can understand quantum mechanics by understanding how we have applied it. We should not seek agreement on the nature of the world it represents, because this theory does not itself represent the physical world (though its applications do help us to represent it better). When applied to a quantum state, quantum mechanics yields probabilities for physical events: both state and probability are objective—not because they represent elements of physical reality, but because each exerts normative authority over the beliefs of anyone who accepts quantum mechanics and applies it relative to a physical situation they may (but need not) occupy. These events may be described by statements (about values of magnitudes) that are meaningful in an appropriate environmental context, and quantum mechanics can help one to say when that is. Measurement creates an appropriate context, so here the Born rule indirectly yields probabilities of measurement outcomes. The quantum state of a system does not “collapse” on measurement: a new state must be assigned relative to a physical situation in which information about the outcome is accessible. Understood this way, there is no measurement problem, and violation of Bell inequalities does not demonstrate “spooky” non-local action. Quantum field theories have no physical ontology of their own: a quantum field is a mathematical object in a model whose application helps to improve and extend our descriptions of the world in other terms. We cannot realise the scenario of Wigner’s friend and its recent extensions: but the data that provide overwhelming evidence for quantum mechanics are objective in the same sense as the relative measurement outcomes described in those scenarios.
Abstract The central limit theorem has been found to apply to random vectors in complex Hilbert space. This amounts to sufficient reason to study the complex–valued Gaussian, looking for relevance to quantum mechanics. Here we show that the Gaussian, with all terms fully complex, acting as a propagator, leads to Schrödinger’s non-relativistic equation including scalar and vector potentials, assuming only that the norm is conserved. No physical laws need to be postulated a priori. It thereby presents as a process of irregular motion analogous to the real random walk but executed under the rules of the complex number system. There is a standard view that Schrödinger’s equation is deterministic, whereas wavefunction “collapse” is probabilistic (by Born’s rule)—we have now a demonstrated linkage to the central limit theorem, indicating a stochastic picture at the foundation of Schrödinger’s equation itself. It may be an example of Wheeler’s “It from bit” with “No underlying law”. Reasons for the primary role of C C are open to discussion. The present derivation is compared with recent reconstructions of the quantum formalism, which have the aim of rationalizing its obscurities.
Abstract We derive the Born rule and quantum interference from an oscillatory field model using standard signal processing and detection theory. Physical particles are modeled as coherent patterns in an underlying oscillatory field, with measurement formalized as finite-window demodulation followed by threshold detection in noise. Key Results Born rule derived: Detection probability P ∝ |Ψ|² emerges as leading-order term in Taylor expansion Falsifiable predictions: Higher-order corrections O(|Ψ|&sup4;) provide testable deviations from standard QM Interference automatic: Arises from superposition of same-frequency components without additional postulates Uncertainty = aliasing: Heisenberg uncertainty relations are equivalent to the Gabor limit from signal processing Schrödinger from Klein-Gordon: Schrödinger equation emerges as non-relativistic envelope dynamics Scope Single-system detection statistics only. Multi-particle entanglement and Bell inequality violations require additional theoretical structure not claimed here. Links ASCRI: systems.ac/4/DP-2504 Research Lab: Dissensus AI Version update (February 2026): Expanded literature review with additional citations and substantive engagement with recent scholarship. v1.1.0 (2026-07-11): §9.2 sinc-law direction corrected; Simulation I/II compute totals stated; scope-disclosure items closed; working-paper number DAI-2517.