Quantum mechanics is famous for its predictive power, as well as for its paradoxical struggle for ontological validity. How can a theory be so successful without describing reality correctly? A plausible explanation emerges from the distinction between causal descriptions and methodological shortcuts. Quantitative analysis is often designed to exploit underlying symmetries of real processes, in order to simplify calculations by avoiding inconsequential complexities. Due to such a methodological step, the principle of quantum superposition cannot be validated as real, even if probability waves are assumed to exist. This conclusion follows from a qualitative demonstration that linear wave interactions produce irreversible information loss, contrary to the assumptions that have defined relevant debates in classical and quantum physics alike.
Quantum mechanics is famous for its predictive power, as well as for its paradoxical struggle for ontological validity. How can a theory be so successful without describing reality correctly? A plausible explanation emerges from the distinction between causal descriptions and methodological shortcuts. Quantitative analysis is often designed to exploit underlying symmetries of real processes, in order to simplify calculations by avoiding inconsequential complexities. Due to such a methodological step, the principle of quantum superposition cannot be validated as real, even if probability waves are assumed to exist. This conclusion follows from a qualitative demonstration that linear wave interactions produce irreversible information loss, contrary to the assumptions that have defined relevant debates in classical and quantum physics alike.
It is possible to completely explain all aspects of quantum mechanics by expressing the relations between physical properties in terms of complex conditional probabilities (Phys. Rev. A 89, 042115(2014)). These fully deterministic probabilities replace the classical notions of phase space geometries and continuous trajectories with a more accurate description that takes into account the role of dynamics in the emergence of reality. We can then understand why so many previous attempts to find a detailed explanation of quantum phenomena have failed: the assumption of a static reality breaks down when the interaction needed to obtain a real effect exceeds Planck`s constant. Beyond that limit, complex conditional probabilities are the only valid expression of the fundamental laws of physics.
Quantum mechanics is often perceived as conceptually paradoxical because it appears to conflict with deeply rooted intuitions about fixed reality, determinism, and observation. This paper does not propose a new physical theory. Instead, it offers an epistemological reframing of quantum mechanics: not as a direct mathematical unveiling of a fully fixed pre-existing reality, but as a highly precise description of phenomenological structures emerging through observational conditions and interaction. The paper explores: the distinction between mathematical predictive success and ontological completeness, the role of human perception in constructing “fixed reality” intuitions, the phenomenological nature of qualities such as color and temperature, the possibility that some conceptual tensions in quantum mechanics arise from assumptions inherited from macroscopic cognition, and how quantum theory may be interpreted as describing observable structures rather than fixed hidden states. The work intentionally avoids mystical, anti-scientific, or consciousness-centric interpretations of quantum mechanics. It does not deny the existence of reality, nor reject modern physics. Rather, it attempts to clarify what exactly mathematical models are describing when applied to quantum phenomena. This text is positioned as a conceptual and phenomenological reorganization of perspective — a small doorway toward reconsidering how humans frame “reality” itself.
Abstract Apparent paradoxes in Quantum Physics demand a sharp distinction between a "real part of the world" and the realm of possibilities. In the former we may distinguish individual elements (coarse events) relating to space-time, with causal connections between them respecting the relativistic locality principle. The latter, quantitatively described by probability assignments conditioned on existing facts and depending on the definition of equivalence classes of situations, cannot be subdivided in space-time categories. There are global correlations (Pauli principle...). The cut between the realms of facts and possibilities implies an evolutionary picture of the "real world" in which the (generalized) arrow of time assumes basic significance. Some deficiencies of existing theory are pointed out.
Quantum theory describes our universe incredibly successfully. To our classically-inclined brains, however, it is a bizarre description that requires a reimagining of what fundamental reality, or “ontology”, could look like. This thesis examines different ontological features in light of the success of quantum theory, what it requires, and what it rules out. While these investigations are primarily foundational, they also have relevance to quantum information, quantum communication, and experiments on quantum systems. The way that quantum theory describes the state of a system is one of its most unintuitive features. It is natural, therefore, to ask whether a similarly strange description of states is required on an ontological level. This thesis proves that almost all quantum superposition states for d > 3 dimensions must be real—that is, present in the ontology in a well-defined sense. This is a strong requirement which prevents intuitive explanations of the many quantum phenomena which are based on superpositions. A new theorem is also presented showing that quantum theory is incompatible with macro-realist ontologies, where certain physical quantities must always have definite values. This improves on the Leggett-Garg argument, which also aims to prove incompatibility with macro-realism but contains loopholes. Variations on both of these results that are error-tolerant (and therefore amenable to experimentation) are presented, as well as numerous related theorems showing that the ontology of quantum states must be somewhat similar to the quantum states themselves in various specific ways. Extending these same methods to quantum communication, a simple proof is found showing that an exponential number of classical bits are required to communicate a linear number of qubits. That is, classical systems are exponentially bad at storing quantum data. Causal influences are another part of ontology where quantum theory demands a revision of our classical notions. This follows from the outcomes of Bell experiments, as rigorously shown in recent analyses. Here, the task of constructing a native quantum framework for reasoning about causal influences is tackled. This is done by first analysing the simple example of a common cause, from which a quantum version of Reichenbach’s principle is identified. This quantum principle relies on an identification of quantum conditional independence which can be defined in four ways, each naturally generalising a corresponding definition for classical conditional independence. Not only does this allow one to reason about common causes in a quantum experiments, but it can also be generalised to a full framework of quantum causal models (mirroring how classical causal models generalise Reichenbach’s principle). This new definition of quantum causal models is illustrated by examples and strengthened by it’s foundation on a robust quantum Reichenbach’s principle. An unusual, but surprisingly fruitful, setting for considering quantum ontology is found by considering time travel to the past. This provides a testbed for different ontological concepts in quantum theory and new ways to compare classical and quantum frameworks. It is especially useful for comparing computational properties. In particular, time travel introduces non-linearity to quantum theory, which brings (sometimes implicit) ontological assumptions to the fore while introducing strange new abilities. Here, a model for quantum time travel is presented which arguably has fewer objectionable features than previous attempts, while remaining similarly well-motivated. This model is discussed and compared with previous quantum models, as well as with the classical case. Together, these threads of investigation develop a better understanding of how quantum theory affects possible ontologies and how ontological prejudices influence quantum theory.
Effects associated in quantum mechanics with a divisible probability wave are explained as physically real consequences of the equal but opposite reaction of the apparatus as a particle is measured. Taking as illustration a Mach-Zehnder interferometer operating by refraction, it is shown that this reaction must comprise a fluctuation in the reradiation field of complementary effect to the changes occurring in the photon as it is projected into one or other path. The evolution of this fluctuation through the experiment will explain the alternative states of the particle discerned in self interference, while the maintenance of equilibrium in the face of such fluctuations becomes the source of the Born probabilities. In this scheme, the probability wave is a mathematical artifact, epistemic rather than ontic, and akin in this respect to the simplifying constructions of geometrical optics.
This paper proposes a conceptual reinterpretation of the transition from microscopic quantum description to macroscopically differentiated reality. Rather than treating the emergence of definite outcomes solely as a problem of observation or wave-function collapse, it examines measurement as an irreversible process of organizational differentiation. In this framework, microscopic possibilities become physically distinguishable realities through interaction, amplification, environmental coupling, information stabilization, and the formation of persistent records. The paper introduces the Generalized Organizational Threshold Hypothesis (GOTH): certain transitions—from quantum alternatives to classical outcomes, from chemistry to life, and from neural activity to cognition—may share an abstract architecture in which quantitative accumulation produces a qualitative reorganization of the system. This proposed similarity is not assumed to establish a universal physical law; it is presented as a testable research hypothesis requiring domain-specific mathematical and experimental validation. The framework distinguishes established quantum theory from interpretive extension and does not claim to replace decoherence theory or existing formulations of quantum mechanics. Instead, it suggests that decoherence explains the suppression of observable interference, whereas organizational differentiation may help explain how stable, causally effective, and historically persistent macroscopic realities emerge. The paper concludes by outlining possible formal variables, comparative models, and empirical criteria through which organizational thresholds could be investigated across different physical and complex systems. Keywords Quantum measurement; quantum-to-classical transition; organizational differentiation; Generalized Organizational Threshold Hypothesis; GOTH; decoherence; emergence; irreversibility; information stabilization; amplification; macroscopic reality; complex systems; threshold dynamics; persistent records; foundations of quantum mechanics.