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

Springer eBooks

The problem of the interpretation of quantum theory

Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker, Thomas Görnitz, Holger Lyre

Published Jan 12, 2007• 3 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/1-4020-5235-9_9

Related papers

On the problem of the interpretation of quantum physics

A. A. Grib

Uspekhi Fizicheskih Nauk•Jan 1, 2013•13 citations

Philosophy of Science for Scientists: The Probabilistic Interpretation of Science

Shiro Ishikawa

Recently we proposed "quantum language" (or, "the linguistic Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics", "measurement theory") as the language of science.This theory asserts the probabilistic interpretation of science (=the linguistic quantum mechanical worldview), which is a kind of mathematical generalization of Born's probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics.In this paper, we consider the most fundamental problems in philosophy of science such as Hempel's raven paradox, Hume's problem of induction, Goodman's grue paradox, Peirce's abduction, flagpole problem, which are closely related to measurement.We believe that these problems can never be solved without the basic theory of science with axioms.Since our worldview (=quantum language) has the axiom concerning measurement, these problems can be solved easily.Thus we believe that quantum language is the central theory in philosophy of science.Hence there is a reason to assert that quantum language gives the mathematical foundations to science.

Journal of Quantum Information Science•Jan 1, 2019•5 citations

The Brain Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics and the Unveiling of Material Consciousness

Christopher Giguere

Many open questions or unsolved problems exist in all areas of physics. In Foundations of Physics, one open question, a century old, is how does quantum reality give rise to classical reality. This is called the quantum-classical transition, for which there are many interpretations formally called the interpretations of quantum mechanics. Now, the open problem may be located in physics, but is ultimately a philosophical problem. Physics has been unable to solve this problem with the methods of physics, say mathematics. Instead, the problem is philosophical in nature—the discipline from which physics came about—and so needs (in spite of what many hardcore physicists may detest) philosophy to solve this problem. A new angle on the subject is required; perhaps a different science may be useful, that of neuroscience. The alternative theory presented here, the Brain Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (BIQM)—which states that classical reality is the brain’s interpretation of quantum reality appearing in our collective consciousness—represents a multidisciplinary fusion of philosophy of physics, neuroscience, and consciousness studies to attack this key and lingering unsolved problem in the Foundations of Physics. This paper seeks to provide solutions for two main unsolved problems: 1) the interpretation of quantum mechanics and, by virtue, 2) the consciousness/matter problem, which is an open problem in the philosophy of mind and consciousness studies. This article not only represents an interpretation of quantum mechanics, but is a fairly comprehensive theory of reality.

•Aug 12, 2025•0 citations

Critical remarks on the interpretation of quantum theory

Alfred Lands

Journal of the Franklin Institute•Jul 1, 1938•4 citations

Interpretation of Quantum Theory: The Quantum “Grue-Bleen” Problem

Benjamin W. Schumacher, Michael D. Westmoreland

We present a critique of the many-world interpretation of quantum mechanics, based on different "pictures" that describe the time evolution of an isolated quantum system. Without an externally imposed frame to restrict these possible pictures, the theory cannot yield non-trivial interpretational statements. This is analogous to Goodman's famous "grue-bleen" problem of language and induction. Using a general framework applicable to many kinds of dynamical theories, we try to identify the kind of additional structure (if any) required for the meaningful interpretation of a theory. We find that the "grue-bleen" problem is not restricted to quantum mechanics, but also affects other theories including classical Hamiltonian mechanics. For all such theories, absent external frame information, an isolated system has no interpretation.

arXiv:2207.00502•Entropy•Sep 9, 2022•0 citations

Critical Remarks on the Interpretation of Quantum Theory

Alfred Landé

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 1988•1 citation
Recently we proposed "quantum language" (or, "the linguistic Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics", "measurement theory") as the language of science.This theory asserts the probabilistic interpretation of science (=the linguistic quantum mechanical worldview), which is a kind of mathematical generalization of Born's probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics.In this paper, we consider the most fundamental problems in philosophy of science such as Hempel's raven paradox, Hume's problem of induction, Goodman's grue paradox, Peirce's abduction, flagpole problem, which are closely related to measurement.We believe that these problems can never be solved without the basic theory of science with axioms.Since our worldview (=quantum language) has the axiom concerning measurement, these problems can be solved easily.Thus we believe that quantum language is the central theory in philosophy of science.Hence there is a reason to assert that quantum language gives the mathematical foundations to science.
Many open questions or unsolved problems exist in all areas of physics. In Foundations of Physics, one open question, a century old, is how does quantum reality give rise to classical reality. This is called the quantum-classical transition, for which there are many interpretations formally called the interpretations of quantum mechanics. Now, the open problem may be located in physics, but is ultimately a philosophical problem. Physics has been unable to solve this problem with the methods of physics, say mathematics. Instead, the problem is philosophical in nature—the discipline from which physics came about—and so needs (in spite of what many hardcore physicists may detest) philosophy to solve this problem. A new angle on the subject is required; perhaps a different science may be useful, that of neuroscience. The alternative theory presented here, the Brain Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (BIQM)—which states that classical reality is the brain’s interpretation of quantum reality appearing in our collective consciousness—represents a multidisciplinary fusion of philosophy of physics, neuroscience, and consciousness studies to attack this key and lingering unsolved problem in the Foundations of Physics. This paper seeks to provide solutions for two main unsolved problems: 1) the interpretation of quantum mechanics and, by virtue, 2) the consciousness/matter problem, which is an open problem in the philosophy of mind and consciousness studies. This article not only represents an interpretation of quantum mechanics, but is a fairly comprehensive theory of reality.
We present a critique of the many-world interpretation of quantum mechanics, based on different "pictures" that describe the time evolution of an isolated quantum system. Without an externally imposed frame to restrict these possible pictures, the theory cannot yield non-trivial interpretational statements. This is analogous to Goodman's famous "grue-bleen" problem of language and induction. Using a general framework applicable to many kinds of dynamical theories, we try to identify the kind of additional structure (if any) required for the meaningful interpretation of a theory. We find that the "grue-bleen" problem is not restricted to quantum mechanics, but also affects other theories including classical Hamiltonian mechanics. For all such theories, absent external frame information, an isolated system has no interpretation.