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

The Theory of Quantum Wave Sources

Keith Maxwell Hardy

Published Jun 1, 2013• 1 citation
OpenAlex

Abstract

I replace the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics with the Wave Source Interpretation, which I give now. When a quantum wave’s location is observed in a small area, it collapses to a transversal wave source. If this small region is three-dimensional, then the quantum wave would act like a three-dimensional transversal wave source. The three-dimensional transversal wave source has characteristics that parallel leptons’ and hadrons’ characteristics. These properties are derived from the wave sources in this paper without relying on quantum theory. I claim that elementary particles have wave sources as their foundational structure.

Related papers

Quantum Waves in Nature, a New Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

John R. Carlson

We propose a new interpretation of quantum mechanics to address challenges of the Copenhagen Interpretation and to explain observations from certain double-slit experiments. We explore some characteristics of quantum mechanics and analyze a quantum mechanical model which leads us to the assumptions for our new interpretation. We show how quantized waves, like those in Schrodinger’s wave equation, might exist in nature and explain the fundamentals of quantum-scale processes including: the above-mentioned double-slit experiments, wave function collapse, quantum entanglement and quantum tunneling. We classify our interpretation based on commonly used criteria. Finally, we consider some future theoretical points and list some experimental questions. Our new interpretation has the potential to facilitate new theory and experiments leading to a better understanding of fundamental processes in nature and possibly new applications for quantum theory. Page 18 is updated and there is a new suggestion about entanglement on page 20.

•Feb 1, 2017•0 citations

Copenhagen Quantum Mechanics Emerges from a Deterministic Schroedinger Theory in 11 Dimensional Spacetime Including Weak Field Gravitation

G. Doyen, D. Drakova

We construct a world model consisting of a matter field living in 4 dimensional spacetime and a gravitational field living in 11 dimensional spacetime. The seven hidden dimensions are compactified within a radius estimated by reproducing the particle - wave characteristic of diffraction experiments. In the presence of matter fields the gravitational field develops localized modes with elementary excitations called gravonons which are induced by the sources (massive particles). The final world model treated here contains only gravonons and a scalar matter field. The solution of the Schroedinger equation for the world model yields matter fields which are localized in the 4 dimensional subspace. The localization has the following properties: (i) There is a chooser mechanism for the selection of the localization site. (ii) The chooser selects one site on the basis of minor energy differences and differences in the gravonon structure between the sites, which appear statistical. (iii) The changes from one localization site to a neighbouring one take place in a telegraph-signal like manner. (iv) The times at which telegraph like jumps occur dependent on subtleties of the gravonon structure which appear statistical. (v) The fact that the dynamical law acts in the configuration space of fields living in 11 dimensional spacetime lets the events observed in 4 dimensional spacetime appear non-local. In this way the phenomenology of Copenhagen quantum mechanics is obtained without the need of introducing the process of collapse and a probabilistic interpretation of the wave function. Operators defining observables need not be introduced. All experimental findings are explained in a deterministic way as a consequence of the time development of the wave function in configuration space according to Schroedinger's equation.

arXiv:1408.2716•Aug 12, 2014•0 citations

Toward a Local, Realist, 3D Wave Field Theory of Quantum Mechanics

James Arneberg

I propose a local, realist interpretation of quantum mechanics based on a physical scalar wave field in ordinary three-dimensional space. Each fundamental particle (electron, photon, proton, etc.) possesses its own wave field. The field is fundamental — it is not emitted by the particle, nor does it draw energy from the particle’s motion. The particle is guided by the phase gradient of its own wave via a Bohmian guidance law. The wave evolves according to a linear Klein-Gordon equation. For a single particle this reproduces the full empirical success of quantum mechanics, including the hydrogen spectrum and the double-slit interference pattern. For multiple particles, each particle retains its own local 3D wave; no configuration space is needed. Entanglement is rejected as a fundamental physical phenomenon: the correlations observed in Bell-type experiments are interpreted as ordinary statistical correlations arising from common past interactions, not as evidence of non-locality or of a non-separable quantum state. The quantum mechanical wave function in configuration space is regarded as a mathematical tool, not a physical field. The theory is local, realist, and fully three-dimensional.

•May 8, 2026•0 citations

Quantum Theory Comes in Waves and Particles

Walter A. Harrison

Certainly there is no unique answer to Frank Wilczek’s question, “What Is Quantum Theory?” (Physics Today, June 2000, page 11). I was not certain that a pragmatic answer, which I proposed for a course in applied quantum mechanics, 1 1. W. A. Harrison, Applied Quantum Mechanics, World Scientific, River Edge, N.J. (2000). would be sustainable for the entire course, but it seems that it was. That answer was the assertion that everything is both a particle and a wave, and that everything else would follow from that one assertion. Planck’s constant arose when the velocity of a wave (the derivative of the frequency with respect to wavenumber) was equated to the velocity of a particle (the derivative of the energy with respect to momentum), so that energy is proportional to frequency and momentum to wavenumber, with the same proportionality constant ħ. When Hamiltonian mechanics was introduced, “everything” became anything that can be described by such mechanics, or anything that satisfies a wave equation. Quantum theory does not say what nature gives, only how to predict the behavior of what is given. If nature serves up particles with half-integral angular momentum, the wavefunction that describes them must go into its negative when they are interchanged, and they therefore obey the Pauli principle.Such principles, which historically arose as independent conjectures, now follow from the one assertion. It is a matter of seeing how this peculiar assertion can turn out to be absolutely true.The relation between quantum theory and the physical world was seen as follows: Quantum theory tells what future scenarios are consistent with some initial information, and what the relative probability of each scenario is. Quantum theory cannot tell more than that, but neither can any other theory.My pragmatic approach may not satisfy everyone’s philosophical needs. But the aim of an applied quantum course is to see how to use the theory and to introduce the many approximations that have made the theory accessible to physicists and engineers. If some basic consequences are difficult to accept, the problem must lie with the initial assertion from which the consequences follow.REFERENCESection:ChooseTop of pageREFERENCE <<1. W. A. Harrison, Applied Quantum Mechanics, World Scientific, River Edge, N.J. (2000). Google ScholarCrossref© 2001 American Institute of Physics.

Physics Today•Jun 1, 2001•0 citations

A simple means for deriving quantum mechanics

Eric Tesse

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.

quant-pharXiv:2602.04524•Feb 5, 2026•0 citations

Copenhagen Quantum Mechanics Emerges from a Deterministic Schrödinger Theory in 11 Dimensional Spacetime Including Weak Field Gravitation

G. Doyen, D. Drakova

We construct a world model consisting of a matter field living in 4 dimensional spacetime and a gravitational field living in 11 dimensional spacetime. The seven hidden dimensions are compactified within a radius estimated by reproducing the particle–wave characteristics of diffraction experiments. In the presence of matter fields the gravitational field develops localized modes with elementary excitations called gravonons which are induced by the sources (massive particles). The final world model treated here contains only gravonons and a scalar matter field. The gravonons are localized in the environment of the massive particles which generate them. The solution of the Schrödinger equation for the world model yields matter fields which are localized in the 4 dimensional subspace. The localization has the following properties: (i) There is a chooser mechanism for the selection of the localization site. (ii) The chooser selects one site on the basis of minor energy differences and differences in the gravonon structure between the sites, which at present cannot be controlled experimentally and therefore let the choice appear statistical. (iii) The changes from one localization site to a neighbouring one take place in a telegraph-signal like manner. (iv) The times at which telegraph like jumps occur depend on subtleties of the gravonon structure which at present cannot be controlled experimentally and therefore let the telegraph-like jumps appear statistical. (v) The fact that the dynamical law acts in the configuration space of fields living in 11 dimensional spacetime lets the events observed in 4 dimensional spacetime appear non-local. In this way the phenomenology of CQM is obtained without the need of introducing the process of collapse and a probabilistic interpretation of the wave function. Operators defining observables need not be introduced. All experimental findings are explained in a deterministic way as a consequence of the time development of the wave function in configuration space according to Schrödinger’s equation without the need of introducing a probabilistic interpretation.

Foundations of Physics•Jun 5, 2015•6 citations
I replace the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics with the Wave Source Interpretation, which I give now. When a quantum wave’s location is observed in a small area, it collapses to a transversal wave source. If this small region is three-dimensional, then the quantum wave would act like a three-dimensional transversal wave source. The three-dimensional transversal wave source has characteristics that parallel leptons’ and hadrons’ characteristics. These properties are derived from the wave sources in this paper without relying on quantum theory. I claim that elementary particles have wave sources as their foundational structure.
We propose a new interpretation of quantum mechanics to address challenges of the Copenhagen Interpretation and to explain observations from certain double-slit experiments. We explore some characteristics of quantum mechanics and analyze a quantum mechanical model which leads us to the assumptions for our new interpretation. We show how quantized waves, like those in Schrodinger’s wave equation, might exist in nature and explain the fundamentals of quantum-scale processes including: the above-mentioned double-slit experiments, wave function collapse, quantum entanglement and quantum tunneling. We classify our interpretation based on commonly used criteria. Finally, we consider some future theoretical points and list some experimental questions. Our new interpretation has the potential to facilitate new theory and experiments leading to a better understanding of fundamental processes in nature and possibly new applications for quantum theory. Page 18 is updated and there is a new suggestion about entanglement on page 20.
We construct a world model consisting of a matter field living in 4 dimensional spacetime and a gravitational field living in 11 dimensional spacetime. The seven hidden dimensions are compactified within a radius estimated by reproducing the particle - wave characteristic of diffraction experiments. In the presence of matter fields the gravitational field develops localized modes with elementary excitations called gravonons which are induced by the sources (massive particles). The final world model treated here contains only gravonons and a scalar matter field. The solution of the Schroedinger equation for the world model yields matter fields which are localized in the 4 dimensional subspace. The localization has the following properties: (i) There is a chooser mechanism for the selection of the localization site. (ii) The chooser selects one site on the basis of minor energy differences and differences in the gravonon structure between the sites, which appear statistical. (iii) The changes from one localization site to a neighbouring one take place in a telegraph-signal like manner. (iv) The times at which telegraph like jumps occur dependent on subtleties of the gravonon structure which appear statistical. (v) The fact that the dynamical law acts in the configuration space of fields living in 11 dimensional spacetime lets the events observed in 4 dimensional spacetime appear non-local. In this way the phenomenology of Copenhagen quantum mechanics is obtained without the need of introducing the process of collapse and a probabilistic interpretation of the wave function. Operators defining observables need not be introduced. All experimental findings are explained in a deterministic way as a consequence of the time development of the wave function in configuration space according to Schroedinger's equation.
I propose a local, realist interpretation of quantum mechanics based on a physical scalar wave field in ordinary three-dimensional space. Each fundamental particle (electron, photon, proton, etc.) possesses its own wave field. The field is fundamental — it is not emitted by the particle, nor does it draw energy from the particle’s motion. The particle is guided by the phase gradient of its own wave via a Bohmian guidance law. The wave evolves according to a linear Klein-Gordon equation. For a single particle this reproduces the full empirical success of quantum mechanics, including the hydrogen spectrum and the double-slit interference pattern. For multiple particles, each particle retains its own local 3D wave; no configuration space is needed. Entanglement is rejected as a fundamental physical phenomenon: the correlations observed in Bell-type experiments are interpreted as ordinary statistical correlations arising from common past interactions, not as evidence of non-locality or of a non-separable quantum state. The quantum mechanical wave function in configuration space is regarded as a mathematical tool, not a physical field. The theory is local, realist, and fully three-dimensional.
Certainly there is no unique answer to Frank Wilczek’s question, “What Is Quantum Theory?” (Physics Today, June 2000, page 11). I was not certain that a pragmatic answer, which I proposed for a course in applied quantum mechanics, 1 1. W. A. Harrison, Applied Quantum Mechanics, World Scientific, River Edge, N.J. (2000). would be sustainable for the entire course, but it seems that it was. That answer was the assertion that everything is both a particle and a wave, and that everything else would follow from that one assertion. Planck’s constant arose when the velocity of a wave (the derivative of the frequency with respect to wavenumber) was equated to the velocity of a particle (the derivative of the energy with respect to momentum), so that energy is proportional to frequency and momentum to wavenumber, with the same proportionality constant ħ. When Hamiltonian mechanics was introduced, “everything” became anything that can be described by such mechanics, or anything that satisfies a wave equation. Quantum theory does not say what nature gives, only how to predict the behavior of what is given. If nature serves up particles with half-integral angular momentum, the wavefunction that describes them must go into its negative when they are interchanged, and they therefore obey the Pauli principle.Such principles, which historically arose as independent conjectures, now follow from the one assertion. It is a matter of seeing how this peculiar assertion can turn out to be absolutely true.The relation between quantum theory and the physical world was seen as follows: Quantum theory tells what future scenarios are consistent with some initial information, and what the relative probability of each scenario is. Quantum theory cannot tell more than that, but neither can any other theory.My pragmatic approach may not satisfy everyone’s philosophical needs. But the aim of an applied quantum course is to see how to use the theory and to introduce the many approximations that have made the theory accessible to physicists and engineers. If some basic consequences are difficult to accept, the problem must lie with the initial assertion from which the consequences follow.REFERENCESection:ChooseTop of pageREFERENCE <<1. W. A. Harrison, Applied Quantum Mechanics, World Scientific, River Edge, N.J. (2000). Google ScholarCrossref© 2001 American Institute of Physics.
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.
We construct a world model consisting of a matter field living in 4 dimensional spacetime and a gravitational field living in 11 dimensional spacetime. The seven hidden dimensions are compactified within a radius estimated by reproducing the particle–wave characteristics of diffraction experiments. In the presence of matter fields the gravitational field develops localized modes with elementary excitations called gravonons which are induced by the sources (massive particles). The final world model treated here contains only gravonons and a scalar matter field. The gravonons are localized in the environment of the massive particles which generate them. The solution of the Schrödinger equation for the world model yields matter fields which are localized in the 4 dimensional subspace. The localization has the following properties: (i) There is a chooser mechanism for the selection of the localization site. (ii) The chooser selects one site on the basis of minor energy differences and differences in the gravonon structure between the sites, which at present cannot be controlled experimentally and therefore let the choice appear statistical. (iii) The changes from one localization site to a neighbouring one take place in a telegraph-signal like manner. (iv) The times at which telegraph like jumps occur depend on subtleties of the gravonon structure which at present cannot be controlled experimentally and therefore let the telegraph-like jumps appear statistical. (v) The fact that the dynamical law acts in the configuration space of fields living in 11 dimensional spacetime lets the events observed in 4 dimensional spacetime appear non-local. In this way the phenomenology of CQM is obtained without the need of introducing the process of collapse and a probabilistic interpretation of the wave function. Operators defining observables need not be introduced. All experimental findings are explained in a deterministic way as a consequence of the time development of the wave function in configuration space according to Schrödinger’s equation without the need of introducing a probabilistic interpretation.