Classical and Quantum Aspects of Reality

Silvio Bergia

Reddy Govind

This paper presents a unified conceptual framework — the Dual-Aspect Coin Framework (DACF) — for understanding the nature of quantum fields, quantum objects, classical reality, hierarchical emergence, and the precise relationship between mathematics and physical reality. The framework proposes a three-stage ontology as the foundation of physical existence. The first stage is the germinating stage — quantum fields as pure potentiality, neither static nor flow, prior to any dual-aspect expression, permanently beyond mathematical formulation. The second stage is actualisation — the emergence of a real physical entity when all probability conditions simultaneously converge and are fulfilled. The third stage is the coin — the actualised quantum object carrying two irreducible co-constitutive faces, a static face and a flow face — the first appearance of dual-aspect reality. From this actualised coin, hierarchical emergence proceeds through successive stabilisation events, building from quantum objects through composite particles, atoms, molecules, and macroscopic classical reality. The framework further establishes that mathematical symbols are static formulations and equations are mathematical representations of flow — tools consciousness uses to formulate what has already actualised. Critically, the Schrödinger equation and all quantum mechanical formalism operate exclusively in the post-actualisation domain. The germinating stage is identified as a permanent and structural boundary of mathematical knowledge — not a technical limitation awaiting future resolution but an absolute ontological boundary arising from the fact that the germinating stage is prior to the very conditions that make mathematics possible. This framework resolves wave-particle duality, the measurement problem, the quantum-to-classical transition, and the unre

Jeff Tollaksen

Paul A. Knott

In this article I aim to provide an intuitive and non-technical introduction to decoherence and quantum Darwinism. Together these theories explain how our classical reality emerges from an underlying quantum mechanical description. Here I focus on two aspects of this and explain, firstly, how decoherence can tell us why we never see macroscopic superpositions, such as dead-and-alive cats, in our classical surroundings; and secondly I describe and then provide a resolution to the so-called preferred basis problem. I then introduce recent results demonstrating that certain aspects of classicality are generic phenomena that emerge from the basic mathematical structure of quantum mechanics. This is in stark contrast to previous work in this field that focused on specific models that cannot realistically be scaled up to explicitly answer questions about the macroscopic world. Finally, I demonstrate how decoherence and quantum Darwinism can shed significant light on the measurement problem, and I discuss the implications for how we should interpret quantum mechanics.

V. F. Lenzen

Franz Klaus Jansen

Quantum mechanics have always shown great predictive successes, but also some weird aspects concerning the mathematics-reality correspondence, such as superposition of contradictory events, like a dead and alive cat. Although physicists claim that we have to live with these contradictions, a psycho-biological analysis could propose another explanation. Observation of extra-mental reality is based on direct physical contact between an object, its corresponding sense organ and its mental representation in the brain. In contrast, prediction of the future is no longer directly linked to extra-mental reality, but projects possible observations from the memory of the past into the future. Due to the uncertainty of the future, predictions require mental potentiality, meaning that it may or may not happen in extra-mental reality. Nevertheless, if past observations are regular as in classical physics, they allow predictions with high reliability, whereas if they are irregular as in quantum physics, they are limited to uncertainty and probability. Superposition in classical physics increases space or time units accordingly, whereas quantum superposition considers multiple space locations for the same object at the same time. Thus, the quantum mechanical formalism is in direct contradiction to the philosophical law of non-contradiction, which does not allow considering it as extra-mental reality. However, it has all characteristics of mental potentiality, which allows prediction of future outcomes with probability. The consideration of quantum mechanics as mental potentiality would solve the superposition problem, as well as the measurement and the non-locality problem. According to the regularity or irregularity of observation, classical or quantum mechanical formalism has to be applied for prediction of future dynamics. There is no collapse or continuation of superposition in the wave function, but simply the replacement of an uncertain prediction model by the more certain observation. With this interpretation some weird aspects could be completely eliminated.