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

Foundations of Physics

Superposition in quantum and relativity physics?An interaction interpretation of special relativity theory: Part III

Richard Schlegel

Published Jun 1, 1975• 2 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/bf00717437

Related papers

An interaction interpretation of special relativity theory. Part II

Richard Schlegel

Foundations of Physics•Sep 1, 1973•3 citations

Quantum modalities, interpretation of Quantum Mechanics and Special Relativity, and an experimental test for multiple worlds

Yannis Delmas-Rigoutsos

This paper investigates the physical, experimentable, reality of multiple worlds of Quantum Mechanics. On the basis of a reflection on the fundamental principles of physics (sec. I.A), firmly rejecting the incomprehension imperative often associated with Quantum Mechanics (sec. I.B), and strongly relying on an experimental methodology (sec. I.B) and on the superposition principle, we propose a unified interpretation of quantum physics (sec. II), the potential world modal interpretation. This framework makes multiple-world and pilot-wave interpretations converge. It also clarifies the concepts of potential world and sub-quantical potential particle. Then, we turn to Relativity and sketch out an emergence of Special Relativity without "rods and clocks" (sec. III.A) providing a cinematic and phenomenal interpretation of SR. We suggest to distinguish between given and received gravitation and reason on it at a sub-quantical level (sec. III.B) and formulate the hypothesis that weight is active between potential worlds (sec. III.C). If this effect follows the von Neumann chain, it should be observable with available techniques (sec. III.D). If correct, this hypothesis could contribute explanations for cosmic inflation, dark matter and the cosmological constant problem (sec. IV). Moreover, our cinematic interpretation of relativity in an expanding universe might lead to a justification of the MOND theory (sec. IV.B.3).

•Jan 1, 2019•0 citations

Measurement as Phase Locking: A Physical Interpretation of Quantum Measurement

Rob ten Napel

Measurement as Phase Locking: A Physical Interpretation of Quantum Measurement (Phase Ontology — Part III) addresses one of the most stubborn puzzles in modern physics: what “measurement” physically is, and why a quantum superposition yields a single definite outcome. The paper argues that the measurement problem persists largely because phase is treated as merely descriptive, rather than as a physically real organizing layer. Within a phase-ontological framework, measurement is reinterpreted as a coupling-driven coherence transition. A quantum system begins as a distributed phase configuration. When it interacts with a macroscopic detector (and its environment), the interaction imposes many competing constraints on phase relations. Once coupling crosses a practical threshold, only those configurations that can remain coherently stable with the detector–environment system survive: the system phase-locks into a local, dynamically stable configuration. What standard interpretations call “collapse” is therefore not a mysterious, observer-triggered discontinuity, but an emergent stabilization process governed by coupling strength, environmental structure, and phase stability. The paper also situates this account relative to decoherence: decoherence explains the suppression of interference, while phase locking is proposed as the missing stabilizing mechanism that explains why one localized outcome is realized. Probabilities are interpreted not as hidden variables, but as the relative stability of available phase-locking channels, offering a physical reading of the Born rule. This work is Part III of a seven-part series (Parts I–VII). It builds on the foundations of Parts I and II, prepares the ground for Part IV (entanglement and nonlocal correlations), and points ahead to Part VII for experimental implications and falsifiability.

•Feb 15, 2026•0 citations

Quantum Theory and the Special Theory of Relativity

Gerhard Grössing

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 2000•0 citations

A Relational Resolution of the Duality of Matter and Radiation

Hamid Naghieh

The duality of matter and radiation is traditionally framed as an intrinsic paradox of quantum systems. In part I, we propose it can be reinterpreted as a relational observer dependant-relative phe- nomenon. This relational resolution of wave–particle duality aligns with foundational experiments of quantum theory. The wave/particle behavior emerges from observer’s relative velocity/position with respect to the quantum entity under observation. The wave nature is precived by a rest- observer co-moving with the entity under observation. The particle nature is the relative view of a non co-moving observer with non-zero relative velocity. Part-II Provides compelling evidence supporting the part-I claim. We revisit two foundational experiments–the Davisson–Germer electron scattering experiment (1927) and the Merli–Missiroli– Pozzi (MMP) biprism interference experiment (1976). By re-examining the conditions under which interference patterns emerge, it is argued that wave-particle duality behavior is not intrinsic to individual particles but arises from coherent ensembles of monoenergetic, indistinguishable quantum entities. This interpretation challenges conventional quantum narratives and offers a physically grounded and testable alternative to wave–particle duality. Part III Discusses Measurement, Superposition, and Apparatus Coupling. We argue that the uneasy nature of the epistemological conclusions of quantum mechanics may be rectified under relational resolution. We conclude that any quantum relational interaction can be interpreted as a superposition of ”initial” states in ”space” and superposition of ”final” states in ”time”, and together they form a superposition in ”spacetime”.

•Jan 31, 2026•0 citations

Quantum Theory with Special Relativity

John C. Taylor

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Apr 9, 2001•0 citations
This paper investigates the physical, experimentable, reality of multiple worlds of Quantum Mechanics. On the basis of a reflection on the fundamental principles of physics (sec. I.A), firmly rejecting the incomprehension imperative often associated with Quantum Mechanics (sec. I.B), and strongly relying on an experimental methodology (sec. I.B) and on the superposition principle, we propose a unified interpretation of quantum physics (sec. II), the potential world modal interpretation. This framework makes multiple-world and pilot-wave interpretations converge. It also clarifies the concepts of potential world and sub-quantical potential particle. Then, we turn to Relativity and sketch out an emergence of Special Relativity without "rods and clocks" (sec. III.A) providing a cinematic and phenomenal interpretation of SR. We suggest to distinguish between given and received gravitation and reason on it at a sub-quantical level (sec. III.B) and formulate the hypothesis that weight is active between potential worlds (sec. III.C). If this effect follows the von Neumann chain, it should be observable with available techniques (sec. III.D). If correct, this hypothesis could contribute explanations for cosmic inflation, dark matter and the cosmological constant problem (sec. IV). Moreover, our cinematic interpretation of relativity in an expanding universe might lead to a justification of the MOND theory (sec. IV.B.3).
Measurement as Phase Locking: A Physical Interpretation of Quantum Measurement (Phase Ontology — Part III) addresses one of the most stubborn puzzles in modern physics: what “measurement” physically is, and why a quantum superposition yields a single definite outcome. The paper argues that the measurement problem persists largely because phase is treated as merely descriptive, rather than as a physically real organizing layer. Within a phase-ontological framework, measurement is reinterpreted as a coupling-driven coherence transition. A quantum system begins as a distributed phase configuration. When it interacts with a macroscopic detector (and its environment), the interaction imposes many competing constraints on phase relations. Once coupling crosses a practical threshold, only those configurations that can remain coherently stable with the detector–environment system survive: the system phase-locks into a local, dynamically stable configuration. What standard interpretations call “collapse” is therefore not a mysterious, observer-triggered discontinuity, but an emergent stabilization process governed by coupling strength, environmental structure, and phase stability. The paper also situates this account relative to decoherence: decoherence explains the suppression of interference, while phase locking is proposed as the missing stabilizing mechanism that explains why one localized outcome is realized. Probabilities are interpreted not as hidden variables, but as the relative stability of available phase-locking channels, offering a physical reading of the Born rule. This work is Part III of a seven-part series (Parts I–VII). It builds on the foundations of Parts I and II, prepares the ground for Part IV (entanglement and nonlocal correlations), and points ahead to Part VII for experimental implications and falsifiability.
The duality of matter and radiation is traditionally framed as an intrinsic paradox of quantum systems. In part I, we propose it can be reinterpreted as a relational observer dependant-relative phe- nomenon. This relational resolution of wave–particle duality aligns with foundational experiments of quantum theory. The wave/particle behavior emerges from observer’s relative velocity/position with respect to the quantum entity under observation. The wave nature is precived by a rest- observer co-moving with the entity under observation. The particle nature is the relative view of a non co-moving observer with non-zero relative velocity. Part-II Provides compelling evidence supporting the part-I claim. We revisit two foundational experiments–the Davisson–Germer electron scattering experiment (1927) and the Merli–Missiroli– Pozzi (MMP) biprism interference experiment (1976). By re-examining the conditions under which interference patterns emerge, it is argued that wave-particle duality behavior is not intrinsic to individual particles but arises from coherent ensembles of monoenergetic, indistinguishable quantum entities. This interpretation challenges conventional quantum narratives and offers a physically grounded and testable alternative to wave–particle duality. Part III Discusses Measurement, Superposition, and Apparatus Coupling. We argue that the uneasy nature of the epistemological conclusions of quantum mechanics may be rectified under relational resolution. We conclude that any quantum relational interaction can be interpreted as a superposition of ”initial” states in ”space” and superposition of ”final” states in ”time”, and together they form a superposition in ”spacetime”.