A paradigmatic shift in the foundations of quantum mechanics is recorded, from interpreting to reconstructing quantum theory. Examples of reconstruction are analyzed, and conceptual foundations of the information-theoretic reconstruction developed. A concept of intentionally incomplete reconstruction is introduced to mark the novel content of research in the foundation of quantum theory.
A paradigmatic shift in the foundations of quantum mechanics is recorded, from interpreting to reconstructing quantum theory. Examples of reconstruction are analyzed, and conceptual foundations of the information-theoretic reconstruction developed. A concept of intentionally incomplete reconstruction is introduced to mark the novel content of research in the foundation of quantum theory.
What belongs to quantum theory is no more than what is needed for its derivation. Keeping to this maxim, we record a paradigmatic shift in the foundations of quantum mechanics, where the focus has recently moved from interpreting to reconstructing quantum theory. Several historic and contemporary reconstructions are analyzed, including the work of Hardy, Rovelli, and Clifton, Bub and Halvorson. We conclude by discussing the importance of a novel concept of intentionally incomplete reconstruction. 1. What is Wrong with Interpreting Quantum Mechanics2. Reconstruction of Physical Theory2.1. Schema2.2. Selection of the first principles2.3. Status of the first principles3. Examples of Reconstruction3.1. Early examples of reconstruction3.2. Hardy's reconstruction3.3. Rovelli's reconstruction3.4. The CBH reconstruction3.5. Intentionally incomplete reconstructions4. Conclusion
Abstract The reconstruction of quantum physics has been connected with the interpretation of the quantum formalism, and has continued to be so with the recent deeper consideration of the relation of information to quantum states and processes. This recent form of reconstruction has mainly involved conceiving quantum theory on the basis of informational principles, providing new perspectives on physical correlations and entanglement that can be used to encode information. By contrast to the traditional, interpretational approach to the foundations of quantum mechanics, which attempts directly to establish the meaning of the elements of the theory and often touches on metaphysical issues, the newer, more purely reconstructive approach sometimes defers this task, focusing instead on the mathematical derivation of the theoretical apparatus from simple principles or axioms. In its most pure form, this sort of theory reconstruction is fundamentally the mathematical derivation of the elements of theory from explicitly presented, often operational principles involving a minimum of extra‐mathematical content. Here, a representative series of specifically information‐based treatments—from partial reconstructions that make connections with information to rigorous axiomatizations, including those involving the theories of generalized probability and abstract systems—is reviewed.
The program of reconstructing quantum theory based on information-theoretic principles enjoys much popularity in the foundations of physics. Surprisingly, this endeavor has only received very little attention in philosophy. Here I argue that this should change. This is because, on the one hand, reconstructions can help us to better understand quantum mechanics, and, on the other hand, reconstructions are themselves in need of interpretation. My overall objective, thus, is to motivate the reconstruction program and to show why philosophers should care. My specific aims are threefold. (i) Clarify the relationship between reconstructing and interpreting quantum mechanics, (ii) show how the informational reconstruction of quantum theory puts pressure on standard realist interpretations, (iii) defend the quantum reconstruction program against possible objections.
The quantum reconstruction program seeks to uncover the deeper physical meaning of the quantum formalism by distilling its content into a set of physically graspable postulates. Once reconstructed, one can further elucidate the theory by reflecting philosophically upon the postulates rather than the inscrutable formalism in which the theory is couched. Quantum reconstruction thereby opens up a two-step strategy for developing a quantum conceptual framework that reflects the full physical content of quantum theory and can be used to establish precisely what aspects of the classical conceptual framework are retained, modified, or abandoned. The chapter is organized as follows. Section 11.2 describes the tripartite structure of classical physics, whose coherency I argue underlies its intelligibility. Section 11.3 discusses the lack of intelligibility of quantum physics, analyses the limitations of the main traditional elucidative approaches, and describes how reconstruction can remove the fundamental interpretative bottleneck. Section 11.4 discusses the methodology of reconstruction per se , showing that it is part of the natural life-cycle of physical theories, and summarizes its use in the elucidation of the theories of classical physics. Finally, circling back to quantum theory, Section 11.5 summarizes the reconstruction of quantum theory, and Section 11.6 describes some of the interpretative insights obtained thus far through interpretation of reconstructions of the abstract quantum formalism and the quantum symmetrization postulate.
From a phenomenological and experimental viewpoint, quantum mechanics is remarkably successful in explaining effects and processes in the microscopic world. Recently, however, a growing body of literature has revisited the theory's own formal foundations, specifically addressing issues of self-consistency and completeness. As a major historical example of these foundational challenges, the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) argument famously claimed that the theory is incomplete. While many valid criticisms and refutations of the EPR logic exist, they generally rely on a combination of technical results and conceptual objections to EPR's interpretive assumptions, thus transcending the plain quantum framework itself. Motivated by these trends of examining the theory's structural limits, here we revisit the EPR argument. Focusing on elements essential to the EPR reasoning, we first analyze general quantum correlations for EPR states: (i) the fact that their observables are always associated with non-commuting operators, and (ii) the nature of the correlated information obtained through measurement. From these two points alone, and relying strictly on the core rules of quantum mechanics, we demonstrate how to overturn the alleged EPR incompleteness without invoking any extraneous propositions. Consequently, we show that the standard formalism alone suffices to resolve such type of skepticism regarding the theory's physical reach. This offers, at least in a paradigmatic instance, a powerful indication of a structurally well-founded, self-consistent quantum theory.
This paper introduces Reconstructive Metaphysics as a conceptual and interpretive framework addressing foundational questions in quantum mechanics and cosmological multiverse theories. Rather than proposing a new physical theory, it offers a meta-interpretive approach that reframes quantum indeterminacy, cosmological plurality, time, and consciousness as expressions of a single, dynamically reconstructing reality. The work is intended for researchers in physics, philosophy of science, cosmology, and interdisciplinary studies.