The correct critical analysis of the generally accepted foundations of quantum mechanics is proposed [1]. The purpose of the analysis is to prove that the foundations include logical errors. The principle of the unity of formal logic and dialectics is a methodological basis of the analysis. The result is as follows: (a) the generally accepted foundations (i.e., the interpretation of the experimental data on diffraction of quantum particles; the conception of wave-corpuscle dualism; the probabilistic interpretation of the psi-function) are logical errors; (b) the pseudo-informational meaning is the true meaning of the psi-function. Conclusion is that quantum mechanics is not a physical, objective theory but a pseudo-informational one. Therefore, quantum mechanics should be replaced by a physical, objective quantum theory.
The correct critical analysis of the generally accepted foundations of quantum mechanics is proposed [1]. The purpose of the analysis is to prove that the foundations include logical errors. The principle of the unity of formal logic and dialectics is a methodological basis of the analysis. The result is as follows: (a) the generally accepted foundations (i.e., the interpretation of the experimental data on diffraction of quantum particles; the conception of wave-corpuscle dualism; the probabilistic interpretation of the psi-function) are logical errors; (b) the pseudo-informational meaning is the true meaning of the psi-function. Conclusion is that quantum mechanics is not a physical, objective theory but a pseudo-informational one. Therefore, quantum mechanics should be replaced by a physical, objective quantum theory.
The critical analysis of the generally accepted foundations of quantum mechanics is proposed. The purpose of the analysis is to prove that the foundations include logical errors. The principle of the unity of formal logic and of rational dialectics is a methodological basis of the analysis. The result is as follows: (a) the generally accepted foundations (i.e., the interpretation of the experimental data on diffraction of quantum particles; the conception of wave-corpuscle dualism; the probabilistic interpretation of the psi-function) are logical errors; (b) the pseudo-informational meaning is the true meaning of the psi-function. Conclusion is that quantum mechanics is not a physical, objective theory but a pseudo-informational one. Therefore, quantum mechanics should be replaced by a physical, objective quantum theory. The new (correct) basis of quantum theory is proposed.
The correct approach to the formulation of a new basis of quantum theory and new foundations of theory of atom is proposed. The unity of formal logic and rational dialectics is the correct methodological basis of the approach. The main result is the following principles: (1) the principle of motion of quantum particle; the principle of stability of quantum particle; (3) principle of energy of quantum particle; (4) the principle of speed of translational motion of quantum particle; (5) the principle of rectilinearity of the external (translational) motion of quantum particle; (6) the principle of mass of quantum particle; (7) the principle of acceleration and of deceleration of quantum particle; (8) the principle of translational motion of electron in atom: the translational motion of electron in atom represents the periodical “scattering” of the electron by nucleus; (9) the principle of translational motion of electrons in many-electron atom: the translational motion of electrons in many-electron atom does not lead to formation of the electron shells. The proposed foundations furnish the clue to correct description of reality.
The proposed book consists of two parts and is devoted to the systematic analysis of quantum mechanics and the modern theory of electromagnetic phenomena. Some inaccuracies of the application of mathematics in theoretical physics are discussed. This first part examines in detail the basic concepts of quantum mechanics, its apparatus, methods and applications and demonstrates their groundlessness, and often the internal inconsistency of the most common version of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. The book contains a critical analysis of the experiments underlying this theory. All this together proves that the generally accepted version of quantum mechanics is a temporary construction, and the creation of a new consistent theory of the microcosm is required. The book also discusses some alternative ideas applicable to the microcosm. This book may be useful for students, postgraduates, teachers, scientific and technical workers and anyone interested in the basics of physics. To the English version of the book. This is an English translation of the Russian version of the book. Quotations were also translated from Russian-language publications (therefore, for English-language works they are not a literal original, but they convey the essence of the quotations). However, references to pages or chapters have been corrected for the indicated English-language sources.
Quantum mechanics, a cornerstone of modern physics, elucidates the behavior of particles at the most fundamental level. This paper delves into the foundational aspects and diverse interpretations of quantum mechanics, shedding light on its enigmatic principles and implications. Beginning with a comprehensive overview of the mathematical framework underlying quantum mechanics, including wave functions, operators, and probabilistic interpretations, the study explores key foundational principles such as superposition, uncertainty, and entanglement. Moreover, it critically examines various interpretations of quantum mechanics, including the Copenhagen interpretation, many-worlds interpretation, and pilot-wave theory, elucidating their philosophical underpinnings and empirical consequences. Through a synthesis of theoretical analysis and empirical evidence, this paper navigates the intricate landscape of quantum mechanics, offering insights into its profound implications for our understanding of reality.
The aim of the article is to analyze the ontological foundations of quantum mechanics and the relationship of various interpretations of quantum mechanics with the question of truth in scientific knowledge. The theoretical material (various interpretations of quantum mechanics) was analyzed. The research methods were analysis, comparative-historical and institutional approaches. On the basis of the study, it can be concluded that physicists are only able to predict the probabilities of physical phenomena or processes, without any knowledge of the structure of entity in itself. The study helps to complement the theoretical picture of the ontology of quantum mechanics and to get an idea about the development prospects of the methodology of physical sciences. We should not ascribe properties that are unobservable in experience to the entity because science can truly interpret only the representation of entity in itself in experience and the ways of dealing with it, not future events or possible states of the entity. Otherwise, science “slides” down to the level of dialectical (rhetorical) exercises based not on true premises, but on generally accepted or “authoritative” biases, which gives room to extreme forms of relativism and takes natural scientists away from studying nature to inventing empirically unsupported hypotheses. When, in accordance with the Cartesian ontology, the scientist assumes that the entity is as the “subject” observes it (that is, the “reflection” of the entity in consciousness is identified with entity in itself), this assumption leads the scientist to attempts to “scientifically” describe the future events or the possible states of the entity. The criterion for the truth of a scientific theory put forward by Einstein in his dispute with Bohr remains a fundamentally unattainable ideal. Cognition of nature is probabilistically and fundamentally incomplete since a person can consciously comprehend natural phenomena only within the framework of their representation in the existing being. The probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics is due to the impossibility of knowing things as they exist by themselves, that is, as they exist outside of representation in the mind of the observer. This does not mean that physical entities did not exist before their knowledge: they existed potentially, but were not valid for the observer, that is, conscious. Quantum physics is as incomplete as any other physical theory when compared with an unattainable ideal, but this fact does not negate its truth for modern scientists since quantum theory is based on the results of verified experiments.
(1) Background: Over a dozen constructions have been proposed to untangle the foundations of quantum mechanics (QM). So many irreconcilable schemes raise the suspect that methodological requisites should be discussed before beginning a theoretical construction in QM. In particular, we identify the ensuing issues of methods: formal definitions of particles and waves; incompatible probability theories and the single case problem. (2) Methods of the present inquiry: We tackle the second and third issue with a novel and comprehensive probability theory. Next it applies the theoretical results to quantum physics. (3) Results of the present inquiry: The new probability theory proves how some effects - the impossibility of measuring, the collapse of outcomes, non-locality and counterfactual definiteness - are not exclusive to quantum mechanics but can be observed also in classical context. (4) Conclusions: A probability-based interpretation of quantum mechanics is derived; innovative answers are put forward about quantum dualism, the measurement problem, collapse and the relations between classical and quantum physics.