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

Physics Education

Quantum bombing reality

Steve Adams

Published Nov 1, 1998• 6 citations
Publisher

Abstract

The ideas of quantum mechanics are challenging for students. The quantum bomb thought experiment described here shows how the existence of other possible worlds can affect outcomes in the real world as a result of quantum interference.
DOI
10.1088/0031-9120/33/6/020

Related papers

The Existence and Role of Quantum-state Noise

Aleksandar Perisic

The key observation about the quantum reality is that it looks as if there is a moment when a probability of a quantum event or events becomes reality for us.However, after careful analysis it looks plausible that what we believe is a definite state in our reality, observed as an outcome of a quantum experiment or experiments, is actually not a definite state.From there, we conclude that quantum world is an active world whose influence lies beyond statistical and permanent determination of reality as we know it.

arXiv:1005.0130•NeuroQuantology•Oct 12, 2010•0 citations

On Unitary Evolution and Collapse in Quantum Mechanics

Francesco Giacosa

In the framework of an interference setup in which only two outcomes are possible (such as in the case of a Mach–Zehnder interferometer), we discuss in a simple and pedagogical way the difference between a standard, unitary quantum mechanical evolution and the existence of a real collapse of the wavefunction. This is a central and not-yet resolved question of quantum mechanics and indeed of quantum field theory as well. Moreover, we also present the Elitzur–Vaidman bomb, the delayed choice experiment, and the effect of decoherence. In the end, we propose two simple experiments to visualize decoherence and to test the role of an entangled particle. Quanta 2014; 3: 156–170.

arXiv:1406.2344•Quanta•Nov 27, 2014•14 citations

Realism and quantum mechanics

Peter Edward Hodgson

Scientific realism is discussed in a variety of quantum mechanical settings, and defended against rival views on a number of scores. The search for the hidden is the source of much scientific creativity.

International Studies in the Philosophy of Science•Mar 1, 1997•2 citations

Quantum mechanics and reality Could the solution to the dilemma of indeterminism be a universe in which all possible outcomes of an experiment actually occur

Bryce Seligman DeWitt

•Jan 1, 1970•13 citations

Why interference phenomena do not capture the essence of quantum theory

Lorenzo Catani, Matthew Leifer, David Schmid +1 more

Quantum interference phenomena are widely viewed as posing a challenge to the classical worldview. Feynman even went so far as to proclaim that they are the only mystery and the basic peculiarity of quantum mechanics. Many have also argued that basic interference phenomena force us to accept a number of radical interpretational conclusions, including: that a photon is neither a particle nor a wave but rather a Jekyll-and-Hyde sort of entity that toggles between the two possibilities, that reality is observer-dependent, and that systems either do not have properties prior to measurements or else have properties that are subject to nonlocal or backwards-in-time causal influences. In this work, we show that such conclusions are not, in fact, forced on us by basic interference phenomena. We do so by describing an alternative to quantum theory, a statistical theory of a classical discrete field (the `toy field theory') that reproduces the relevant phenomenology of quantum interference while rejecting these radical interpretational claims. It also reproduces a number of related interference experiments that are thought to support these interpretational claims, such as the Elitzur-Vaidman bomb tester, Wheeler's delayed-choice experiment, and the quantum eraser experiment. The systems in the toy field theory are field modes, each of which possesses, at all times, both a particle-like property (a discrete occupation number) and a wave-like property (a discrete phase). Although these two properties are jointly possessed, the theory stipulates that they cannot be jointly known . The phenomenology that is generally cited in favour of nonlocal or backwards-in-time causal influences ends up being explained in terms of inferences about distant or past systems, and all that is observer-dependent is the observer's knowledge of reality, not reality itself.

arXiv:2111.13727•Quantum•Sep 25, 2023•58 citations

A Continuum Universe Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

Vijay Shankar, Narayanankutty Karuppath

The measurement problem in quantum mechanics has been a cause of much puzzlement over the years. The very idea of having two different versions of reality for the same system has been a cause for much debate. Often quantum mechanics textbooks follow the ‘shut up and calculate’ paradigm. This denies the opportunity for the common student to understand the consequence of one of the most elegant and beautiful aspects of science. The state of the art textbooks give a purely algebraic, perfunctory and monotonous approach where the real consequence of the system is not fully appreciated. A good reason for this is the considerable deviation of the quantum mechanical process from the commonsensical idea of truth, reality and reason. We tend to look at the world in a materialistic, deterministic, causal and objectivistic way. We tend not to accept a world of contradictions. A quantum measurement is essentially an amalgamation of contradictions, mystery and duality. It encompasses an implicit dependence on subjectivity and contradicts with causality as we know it. We look at the world as in the present. But a quantum mechanical measurement is a prediction of the future influenced by the observer or the measurer. This offers a philosophical and pedagogical conundrum. It poses a challenge on not just how our perception of the world might change in addition to providing a big challenge on how to make it compatible with the other successful theories of physics. The most common text book interpretation of quantum mechanics has been the Copenhagen Interpretation suggests the ‘collapse of the wave function’ as a mechanism of transition between duality. But a more bizarre yet elegant theory, extending quantum formalism to the classical domain, called the Many Worlds Interpretation has been catching up very quickly; it stands for the split of the universe when we make a quantum mechanical measurement. Consequently, reality as we is redefined as a universal wave function which is a superposition of several outcomes, which is incompatible with many of the successful concepts of physics and has several problems like the correct idea about probability or basis. We adapt the idea of the universal wave function, but instead suggest a continuum interpretation of quantum mechanics where the universal wave function represents the entire singular universe and the concept of atoms or electrons as conceptually a continuous part of it rather than a distinct separate entity. Such an interpretation could be compatible with other continuum theories like the Superfluid vacuum theory or the Higgs Field.

•May 1, 2021•0 citations
The key observation about the quantum reality is that it looks as if there is a moment when a probability of a quantum event or events becomes reality for us.However, after careful analysis it looks plausible that what we believe is a definite state in our reality, observed as an outcome of a quantum experiment or experiments, is actually not a definite state.From there, we conclude that quantum world is an active world whose influence lies beyond statistical and permanent determination of reality as we know it.
In the framework of an interference setup in which only two outcomes are possible (such as in the case of a Mach–Zehnder interferometer), we discuss in a simple and pedagogical way the difference between a standard, unitary quantum mechanical evolution and the existence of a real collapse of the wavefunction. This is a central and not-yet resolved question of quantum mechanics and indeed of quantum field theory as well. Moreover, we also present the Elitzur–Vaidman bomb, the delayed choice experiment, and the effect of decoherence. In the end, we propose two simple experiments to visualize decoherence and to test the role of an entangled particle. Quanta 2014; 3: 156–170.
Quantum interference phenomena are widely viewed as posing a challenge to the classical worldview. Feynman even went so far as to proclaim that they are the only mystery and the basic peculiarity of quantum mechanics. Many have also argued that basic interference phenomena force us to accept a number of radical interpretational conclusions, including: that a photon is neither a particle nor a wave but rather a Jekyll-and-Hyde sort of entity that toggles between the two possibilities, that reality is observer-dependent, and that systems either do not have properties prior to measurements or else have properties that are subject to nonlocal or backwards-in-time causal influences. In this work, we show that such conclusions are not, in fact, forced on us by basic interference phenomena. We do so by describing an alternative to quantum theory, a statistical theory of a classical discrete field (the `toy field theory') that reproduces the relevant phenomenology of quantum interference while rejecting these radical interpretational claims. It also reproduces a number of related interference experiments that are thought to support these interpretational claims, such as the Elitzur-Vaidman bomb tester, Wheeler's delayed-choice experiment, and the quantum eraser experiment. The systems in the toy field theory are field modes, each of which possesses, at all times, both a particle-like property (a discrete occupation number) and a wave-like property (a discrete phase). Although these two properties are jointly possessed, the theory stipulates that they cannot be jointly known . The phenomenology that is generally cited in favour of nonlocal or backwards-in-time causal influences ends up being explained in terms of inferences about distant or past systems, and all that is observer-dependent is the observer's knowledge of reality, not reality itself.
The measurement problem in quantum mechanics has been a cause of much puzzlement over the years. The very idea of having two different versions of reality for the same system has been a cause for much debate. Often quantum mechanics textbooks follow the ‘shut up and calculate’ paradigm. This denies the opportunity for the common student to understand the consequence of one of the most elegant and beautiful aspects of science. The state of the art textbooks give a purely algebraic, perfunctory and monotonous approach where the real consequence of the system is not fully appreciated. A good reason for this is the considerable deviation of the quantum mechanical process from the commonsensical idea of truth, reality and reason. We tend to look at the world in a materialistic, deterministic, causal and objectivistic way. We tend not to accept a world of contradictions. A quantum measurement is essentially an amalgamation of contradictions, mystery and duality. It encompasses an implicit dependence on subjectivity and contradicts with causality as we know it. We look at the world as in the present. But a quantum mechanical measurement is a prediction of the future influenced by the observer or the measurer. This offers a philosophical and pedagogical conundrum. It poses a challenge on not just how our perception of the world might change in addition to providing a big challenge on how to make it compatible with the other successful theories of physics. The most common text book interpretation of quantum mechanics has been the Copenhagen Interpretation suggests the ‘collapse of the wave function’ as a mechanism of transition between duality. But a more bizarre yet elegant theory, extending quantum formalism to the classical domain, called the Many Worlds Interpretation has been catching up very quickly; it stands for the split of the universe when we make a quantum mechanical measurement. Consequently, reality as we is redefined as a universal wave function which is a superposition of several outcomes, which is incompatible with many of the successful concepts of physics and has several problems like the correct idea about probability or basis. We adapt the idea of the universal wave function, but instead suggest a continuum interpretation of quantum mechanics where the universal wave function represents the entire singular universe and the concept of atoms or electrons as conceptually a continuous part of it rather than a distinct separate entity. Such an interpretation could be compatible with other continuum theories like the Superfluid vacuum theory or the Higgs Field.