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

NeuroQuantology

Collapse of the Wave Function? Pre-Stimuli Heart Rate Differences

Antonella Vannini, Ulisse Di Corpo

Published Sep 16, 2010• 4 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Analyzing the EPR paradox, Schrodinger concluded that the problem lies in the way time is used in quantum mechanics. The Schrodinger wave equation, which was the focus of most of the discussion surrounding EPR, is not relativistically invariant and treats time in an essentially classical way. For example it assumes that there can be a well‐defined before and after the collapse of the wave function. Once the wave function collapses into a particle, the event is irreversible. On the contrary, when the relativistically invariant wave equation (Klein‐Gordon’s equation) is taken into account, there is no collapse of the wave function. In this paper a time symmetric interpretation, proposed by the mathematician Luigi Fantappie in 1941, is presented and four experiments which support this interpretation and challenge the Copenhagen Interpretation are discussed. In Cramer’s Transactional Interpretation and in de Beauregard’s Advanced‐Action Interpretation the EPR paradox disappears when advanced waves are considered to be real physical entities.

DOI
10.14704/nq.2010.8.4.310

Related papers

Quantum Physics, Advanced Waves and Consciousness

Antonella Vannini

An essential component of the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics is Schrodinger’s wave equation. According to this interpretation, consciousness, through the exercise of observation, forces the wave function to collapse into a particle. Schrodinger’s wave equation is not relativistically invariant and when the relativistically invariant wave equation (Klein-Gordon’s equation) is taken into account, there is no collapse of the wave function and no justification for consciousness as a prerequisite to reality. Klein-Gordon’s wave equation depends on a square root and yields two solutions: retarded waves which move forwards in time and advanced waves which move backwards in time. Advanced waves were considered to be unacceptable since they contradict the law of causality, according to which causes always precede effects. However, while studying the mathematical properties of KleinGordon’s equation, the mathematician Luigi Fantappie noted that retarded waves are governed by the law of entropy (from Greek en=diverge, tropos=tendency), whereas advanced waves are governed by a law opposite to entropy which leads to concentration of energy, differentiation, complexity, order and growth of structures. Fantappie named this law syntropy (syn=converge, tropos=tendency) and noted that its properties coincide with the qualities of living systems, arriving in this way at the conclusion that life and consciousness are a consequence of advanced waves (Fantappie, 1942).

•Jan 1, 2011•2 citations

A Time-Symmetric and Retrocausal Resolution of the EPR Paradox

Michael B. Heaney

The Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics explains the Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) experiments with "spooky action at a distance" and nonlocal wavefunction collapse. A time-symmetric and retrocausal interpretation of quantum mechanics explains the same experiments without spooky action at a distance or nonlocal wavefunction collapse. An experiment that can distinguish between the Copenhagen and Time-Symmetric Interpretations is described.

Entropy•Mar 12, 2026•0 citations

Special relativity, EPR, and the collapse of the wave function

M. Socolovsky

We discuss a paradox which appears in EPR experiments when the collapse of the wave function is analyzed in moving reference frames: the collapse can occur before the actual measurement of the spin component (or polarization) of one of the particles. We show that the paradox can be solved using the instantaneity of the reduction process in all reference frames. Using the same concept, we illustrate with an example the impossibility of defining, in certain circumstances, a covariant state vector in all regions of space-time.

Il Nuovo Cimento B•May 1, 2003•0 citations

Wigner's Friend Paradox Revisited

Peter Reichert, Markus Enz

By assuming (i) a universal, observer-independent quantum state, by considering (ii) measurement processes with wave function collapse as part of quantum mechanical time evolution (also within isolated systems), and by (iii) clearly distinguishing the state of a quantum system from the knowledge of conscious observers about this state, we suggest a modified Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics that resolves Wigner's Friend and extended Wigner's Friend paradoxes. The suggested interpretation leads to differences in some outcome probabilities compared to previous analyses which, in principle, make it possible to falsify the suggested modifications or the previous analyses (or both). The fundamental problem of the incompleteness of quantum mechanics in the Copenhagen interpretation regarding the lack of a precise definition and a mechanistic description of the measurement process (including the collapse of the wave function) is not addressed in this study. However, the argumentation regarding the resolution of Wigner's Friend paradoxes also applies to attempts for such a mechanistic description using collapse models with stochastic extensions to the Schrödinger equation or trying to model wave function collapse with unitary time evolution and irreversibility of the measurement process resulting from quantum statistical mechanics.

quant-pharXiv:2608.02635•Aug 3, 2026•0 citations

Collapse of the Wave Function: Irreversibility as a Fundamental Dynamical Principle

Abderrahim Lyoubi-Idrissi

The collapse of the wave function remains one of the deepest puzzles in quantum mechanics. The Schrödinger equation is unitary and time-reversal symmetric, yet measurement requires an additional postulate that is neither—and we have no physical explanation for why. Existing interpretations either deny that collapse is real (Many-Worlds), treat it as purely subjective (QBism), or add stochastic noise by hand without deriving it from fundamental principles (GRW, CSL). We demonstrate that collapse is a real physical process requiring fundamentally irreversible dynamics. No purely unitary, time-symmetric theory can account for the objective suppression of macroscopic superpositions—irreversibility must be built into the dynamics from the start. We introduce a minimal extension of quantum mechanics through coupling to a universal scalar field (the I-field) governed by an explicit time-asymmetric field equation. Collapse emerges objectively through deterministic dissipative dynamics, with no reference to observers, measurement devices, or stochastic noise. By integrating out the I-field degrees of freedom, we derive effective Lindblad dynamics for quantum systems. The collapse rate scales quadratically with system mass, ensuring microscopic quantum coherence remains intact while macroscopic superpositions are dynamically suppressed. Unlike stochastic collapse models (GRW/CSL), the mechanism is deterministic and produces no spontaneous heating. Unlike gravitational collapse proposals (Diósi-Penrose), it provides explicit field equations rather than heuristic arguments. Unlike environmental decoherence, the irreversibility is fundamental rather than effective. The theory respects relativistic causality and makes testable predictions for current and near-future experiments in matter-wave interferometry, optomechanical systems, and molecular interferometry. Observation of mass-dependent decoherence without accompanying stochastic heating would provide strong evidence for the I-field mechanism. The framework establishes irreversibility as a fundamental interaction rather than an emergent phenomenon, providing a unified physical origin for both wave function collapse and the quantum arrow of time.

•Jan 16, 2026•0 citations

Overcoming the EPR paradox

Ghenadie N. Mardari

Quantum experiments detect particles, but they reveal information about wave properties. No matter how quanta are detected, they always express the local net state of the corresponding wave-function. The mechanism behind this process is still a mystery. However, quantum wave-functions evolve like classical waves. If they determine all the observations, why do they entail "weird" phenomena? In particular, why do they produce conceptual problems, such as the EPR paradox? It turns out that all the major interpretations in quantum mechanics are particle-based ontologies. Variables of fundamental interest, such as momentum and position, are assumed to reflect the input states of discrete entities, even when their evolution is predicted by wave equations. Here I show that a whole class of microscopic phenomena, including entanglement, can be interpreted without contradictions if the variables of quantum mechanics are actually treated as wave properties. The main recommendation is to assume that sharp spectral states are transient outcomes of superposition, rather than permanent input components.

arXiv:quant-ph/0412160•Dec 21, 2004•1 citation
Analyzing the EPR paradox, Schrodinger concluded that the problem lies in the way time is used in quantum mechanics. The Schrodinger wave equation, which was the focus of most of the discussion surrounding EPR, is not relativistically invariant and treats time in an essentially classical way. For example it assumes that there can be a well‐defined before and after the collapse of the wave function. Once the wave function collapses into a particle, the event is irreversible. On the contrary, when the relativistically invariant wave equation (Klein‐Gordon’s equation) is taken into account, there is no collapse of the wave function. In this paper a time symmetric interpretation, proposed by the mathematician Luigi Fantappie in 1941, is presented and four experiments which support this interpretation and challenge the Copenhagen Interpretation are discussed. In Cramer’s Transactional Interpretation and in de Beauregard’s Advanced‐Action Interpretation the EPR paradox disappears when advanced waves are considered to be real physical entities.
An essential component of the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics is Schrodinger’s wave equation. According to this interpretation, consciousness, through the exercise of observation, forces the wave function to collapse into a particle. Schrodinger’s wave equation is not relativistically invariant and when the relativistically invariant wave equation (Klein-Gordon’s equation) is taken into account, there is no collapse of the wave function and no justification for consciousness as a prerequisite to reality. Klein-Gordon’s wave equation depends on a square root and yields two solutions: retarded waves which move forwards in time and advanced waves which move backwards in time. Advanced waves were considered to be unacceptable since they contradict the law of causality, according to which causes always precede effects. However, while studying the mathematical properties of KleinGordon’s equation, the mathematician Luigi Fantappie noted that retarded waves are governed by the law of entropy (from Greek en=diverge, tropos=tendency), whereas advanced waves are governed by a law opposite to entropy which leads to concentration of energy, differentiation, complexity, order and growth of structures. Fantappie named this law syntropy (syn=converge, tropos=tendency) and noted that its properties coincide with the qualities of living systems, arriving in this way at the conclusion that life and consciousness are a consequence of advanced waves (Fantappie, 1942).
We discuss a paradox which appears in EPR experiments when the collapse of the wave function is analyzed in moving reference frames: the collapse can occur before the actual measurement of the spin component (or polarization) of one of the particles. We show that the paradox can be solved using the instantaneity of the reduction process in all reference frames. Using the same concept, we illustrate with an example the impossibility of defining, in certain circumstances, a covariant state vector in all regions of space-time.
By assuming (i) a universal, observer-independent quantum state, by considering (ii) measurement processes with wave function collapse as part of quantum mechanical time evolution (also within isolated systems), and by (iii) clearly distinguishing the state of a quantum system from the knowledge of conscious observers about this state, we suggest a modified Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics that resolves Wigner's Friend and extended Wigner's Friend paradoxes. The suggested interpretation leads to differences in some outcome probabilities compared to previous analyses which, in principle, make it possible to falsify the suggested modifications or the previous analyses (or both). The fundamental problem of the incompleteness of quantum mechanics in the Copenhagen interpretation regarding the lack of a precise definition and a mechanistic description of the measurement process (including the collapse of the wave function) is not addressed in this study. However, the argumentation regarding the resolution of Wigner's Friend paradoxes also applies to attempts for such a mechanistic description using collapse models with stochastic extensions to the Schrödinger equation or trying to model wave function collapse with unitary time evolution and irreversibility of the measurement process resulting from quantum statistical mechanics.
The collapse of the wave function remains one of the deepest puzzles in quantum mechanics. The Schrödinger equation is unitary and time-reversal symmetric, yet measurement requires an additional postulate that is neither—and we have no physical explanation for why. Existing interpretations either deny that collapse is real (Many-Worlds), treat it as purely subjective (QBism), or add stochastic noise by hand without deriving it from fundamental principles (GRW, CSL). We demonstrate that collapse is a real physical process requiring fundamentally irreversible dynamics. No purely unitary, time-symmetric theory can account for the objective suppression of macroscopic superpositions—irreversibility must be built into the dynamics from the start. We introduce a minimal extension of quantum mechanics through coupling to a universal scalar field (the I-field) governed by an explicit time-asymmetric field equation. Collapse emerges objectively through deterministic dissipative dynamics, with no reference to observers, measurement devices, or stochastic noise. By integrating out the I-field degrees of freedom, we derive effective Lindblad dynamics for quantum systems. The collapse rate scales quadratically with system mass, ensuring microscopic quantum coherence remains intact while macroscopic superpositions are dynamically suppressed. Unlike stochastic collapse models (GRW/CSL), the mechanism is deterministic and produces no spontaneous heating. Unlike gravitational collapse proposals (Diósi-Penrose), it provides explicit field equations rather than heuristic arguments. Unlike environmental decoherence, the irreversibility is fundamental rather than effective. The theory respects relativistic causality and makes testable predictions for current and near-future experiments in matter-wave interferometry, optomechanical systems, and molecular interferometry. Observation of mass-dependent decoherence without accompanying stochastic heating would provide strong evidence for the I-field mechanism. The framework establishes irreversibility as a fundamental interaction rather than an emergent phenomenon, providing a unified physical origin for both wave function collapse and the quantum arrow of time.
Quantum experiments detect particles, but they reveal information about wave properties. No matter how quanta are detected, they always express the local net state of the corresponding wave-function. The mechanism behind this process is still a mystery. However, quantum wave-functions evolve like classical waves. If they determine all the observations, why do they entail "weird" phenomena? In particular, why do they produce conceptual problems, such as the EPR paradox? It turns out that all the major interpretations in quantum mechanics are particle-based ontologies. Variables of fundamental interest, such as momentum and position, are assumed to reflect the input states of discrete entities, even when their evolution is predicted by wave equations. Here I show that a whole class of microscopic phenomena, including entanglement, can be interpreted without contradictions if the variables of quantum mechanics are actually treated as wave properties. The main recommendation is to assume that sharp spectral states are transient outcomes of superposition, rather than permanent input components.