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 quantum field theory interpretation of quantum mechanics

de la Torre, Carlos Alberto

Published Mar 2, 2015• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

It is shown that adopting the \emph{Quantum Field} ---extended entity in space-time build by dynamic appearance propagation and annihilation of virtual particles--- as the primary ontology the astonishing features of quantum mechanics can be rendered intuitive. This interpretation of quantum mechanics follows from the formalism of the most successful theory in physics: quantum field theory.

Related papers

The quantum field theory interpretation of quantum mechanics

Alberto C. de la Torre

It is shown that adopting the \emph{Quantum Field} ---extended entity in space-time build by dynamic appearance propagation and annihilation of virtual particles--- as the primary ontology the astonishing features of quantum mechanics can be rendered intuitive. This interpretation of quantum mechanics follows from the formalism of the most successful theory in physics: quantum field theory.

arXiv:1503.00675•Mar 2, 2015•0 citations

Quantum Mechanics as a Classical Field Theory

de la Torre, A. C., Alejandro Daleo

The formalism of quantum mechanics is presented in a way that its interpretation as a classical field theory is emphasized. Two coupled real fields are defined with given equations of motion. Densities and currents associated to the fields are found with their corresponding conserved quantities. The behavior of these quantities under a galilean transformation suggest the association of the fields with a quantum mechanical free particle. An external potential is introduced in the Lagrange formalism. The description is equivalent to the conventional Schrödinger equation treatment of a particle. We discuss the attempts to build an interpretation of quantum mechanics based on this scheme. The fields become the primary onthology of the theory and the particles appear as emergent properties of the fields. These interpretations face serious problems for systems with many degrees of freedom.

arXiv:quant-ph/9905032•May 10, 1999•0 citations

Universal Field Theory: An Ontological Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

Vassilis Savvides

This paper proposes Universal Field Theory (UFT), an ontological interpretation of quantum mechanics in which the Universal Field is taken to be a real structure containing all physically possible configurations permitted by the laws of physics. Observable physical reality corresponds to the subset of configurations that become realized as excitation patterns within the field. In this framework, quantum probabilities arise from the density of realizable configurations encoded in the wave structure of the field. The approach preserves the predictive formalism of quantum mechanics while offering a unified conceptual interpretation linking field ontology, configuration space, and the emergence of physical reality.

•Mar 20, 2026•0 citations

Why Interpret Quantum Mechanics

Edward M. MacKinnon

This article probes the question of what interpretations of quantum mechanics actually accomplish. In other domains, which are briefly considered, interpretations serve to make alien systematizations intelligible to us. This often involves clarifying the status of their implicit ontology. A survey of interpretations of non-relativistic quantum mechanics supports the evaluation that these interpretations make a contribution to philosophy, but not to physics. Interpretations of quantum field theory are polarized by the divergence between the Lagrangian field theory that led to the Standard Model of Particle physics and the Algebraic quantum field theory, that discounts an ontology of particles. Ruetsche's interpretation, it is argued, offers a potential for loosening the sharp polarization that presently obtains. A brief evaluation focuses on the functional ontology of quantum field theory considered as an effective theory.

•Jan 1, 2016•0 citations

Why Interpret Quantum Physics?

Edward M. MacKinnon

This article probes the question of what interpretations of quantum mechanics actually accomplish. In other domains, which are briefly considered, interpretations serve to make alien systematizations intelligible to us. This often involves clarifying the status of their implicit ontology. A survey of interpretations of non-relativistic quantum mechanics supports the evaluation that these interpretations make a contribution to philosophy, but not to physics. Interpretations of quantum field theory are polarized by the divergence between the Lagrangian field theory, which leads to the Standard Model of Particle physics and the Algebraic quantum field theory that discounts an ontology of particles. Ruetsche’s interpretation offers a potential for loosening the sharp polarization that presently obtains. A brief evaluation focuses on the functional ontology of quantum field theory considered as an effective theory.

Open Journal of Philosophy•Jan 1, 2016•2 citations

On the Metaphysics of Quantum Mechanics

Valia Allori

What is quantum mechanics about? The most natural way to interpret quantum mechanics realistically as a theory about the world might seem to be what is called wave function ontology: the view according to which the wave function mathematically represents in a complete way fundamentally all there is in the world. We argue that: • Strictly speaking, it is not possible to interpret quantum theories as theories about the wave function; • Even if the wave function is supplemented by additional non-ontological structures, there are reasons not to take the resulting theory seriously; • All quantum theories should be regarded as theories in which physical objects are constituted by a primitive ontology. The primitive ontology is mathematically represented in the theory by a mathematical entity in three-dimensional space, or space-time.

•Jan 1, 2013•38 citations
It is shown that adopting the \emph{Quantum Field} ---extended entity in space-time build by dynamic appearance propagation and annihilation of virtual particles--- as the primary ontology the astonishing features of quantum mechanics can be rendered intuitive. This interpretation of quantum mechanics follows from the formalism of the most successful theory in physics: quantum field theory.
The formalism of quantum mechanics is presented in a way that its interpretation as a classical field theory is emphasized. Two coupled real fields are defined with given equations of motion. Densities and currents associated to the fields are found with their corresponding conserved quantities. The behavior of these quantities under a galilean transformation suggest the association of the fields with a quantum mechanical free particle. An external potential is introduced in the Lagrange formalism. The description is equivalent to the conventional Schrödinger equation treatment of a particle. We discuss the attempts to build an interpretation of quantum mechanics based on this scheme. The fields become the primary onthology of the theory and the particles appear as emergent properties of the fields. These interpretations face serious problems for systems with many degrees of freedom.
This paper proposes Universal Field Theory (UFT), an ontological interpretation of quantum mechanics in which the Universal Field is taken to be a real structure containing all physically possible configurations permitted by the laws of physics. Observable physical reality corresponds to the subset of configurations that become realized as excitation patterns within the field. In this framework, quantum probabilities arise from the density of realizable configurations encoded in the wave structure of the field. The approach preserves the predictive formalism of quantum mechanics while offering a unified conceptual interpretation linking field ontology, configuration space, and the emergence of physical reality.
This article probes the question of what interpretations of quantum mechanics actually accomplish. In other domains, which are briefly considered, interpretations serve to make alien systematizations intelligible to us. This often involves clarifying the status of their implicit ontology. A survey of interpretations of non-relativistic quantum mechanics supports the evaluation that these interpretations make a contribution to philosophy, but not to physics. Interpretations of quantum field theory are polarized by the divergence between the Lagrangian field theory that led to the Standard Model of Particle physics and the Algebraic quantum field theory, that discounts an ontology of particles. Ruetsche's interpretation, it is argued, offers a potential for loosening the sharp polarization that presently obtains. A brief evaluation focuses on the functional ontology of quantum field theory considered as an effective theory.
This article probes the question of what interpretations of quantum mechanics actually accomplish. In other domains, which are briefly considered, interpretations serve to make alien systematizations intelligible to us. This often involves clarifying the status of their implicit ontology. A survey of interpretations of non-relativistic quantum mechanics supports the evaluation that these interpretations make a contribution to philosophy, but not to physics. Interpretations of quantum field theory are polarized by the divergence between the Lagrangian field theory, which leads to the Standard Model of Particle physics and the Algebraic quantum field theory that discounts an ontology of particles. Ruetsche’s interpretation offers a potential for loosening the sharp polarization that presently obtains. A brief evaluation focuses on the functional ontology of quantum field theory considered as an effective theory.
What is quantum mechanics about? The most natural way to interpret quantum mechanics realistically as a theory about the world might seem to be what is called wave function ontology: the view according to which the wave function mathematically represents in a complete way fundamentally all there is in the world. We argue that: • Strictly speaking, it is not possible to interpret quantum theories as theories about the wave function; • Even if the wave function is supplemented by additional non-ontological structures, there are reasons not to take the resulting theory seriously; • All quantum theories should be regarded as theories in which physical objects are constituted by a primitive ontology. The primitive ontology is mathematically represented in the theory by a mathematical entity in three-dimensional space, or space-time.