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

Circumveiloped by Obscuritads. The nature of interpretation in quantum mechanics, hermeneutic circles and physical reality, with cameos

Jacques Derrida, Frederik Müller

Published Jan 1, 2013• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

Summary. The quest for finding the right interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (QM) is as old als QM and still has not ended, and may never end. The question what an interpretation of QM is has hardly ever been raised explicitly, let alone answered. We raise it and answer it. Then the quest for the right interpretation can continue self-consciously, for we then know exactly what we are after. We present a list of minimal requirements that something has to meet in order to qualify as an interpretation of QM. We also raise, as a side issue, the question how the discourse on the interpretation of QM relates to hermeneutics in Continental Philosophy.

Related papers

Circumveiloped by Obscuritads. The nature of interpretation in quantum mechanics, hermeneutic circles and physical reality, with cameos of James Joyce and Jacques Derrida

Frederik Müller

The quest for finding the right interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (QM) is as old als QM and still has not ended, and may never end. The question what an interpretation of QM is has hardly ever been raised explicitly, let alone answered. We raise it and answer it. Then the quest for the right interpretation can continue self-consciously, for we then know exactly what we are after. We present a list of minimal requirements that something has to meet in order to qualify as an interpretation of QM. We also raise, as a side issue, the question how the discourse on the interpretation of QM relates to hermeneutics in Continental Philosophy.

arXiv:1406.6284•Jun 21, 2014•6 citations

Uncertain for a century: quantum mechanics and the dilemma of interpretation

Adam Frank

Quantum mechanics, the physical theory describing the microworld, is one of science's greatest triumphs. Remarkably, however, after more than 100 years it is still unclear what quantum mechanics means in terms of basic philosophical questions about the nature of reality. While there are many interpretations of the mathematical machinery of quantum physics, there remain no experimental means to distinguish between most of them. In this contribution, I wish to consider the ways in which the enduring lack of an agreed-upon interpretation of quantum physics influences a number of critical philosophical debates about physics and reality. I briefly review two problems affected by quantum interpretations: the meaning of the term universe and the nature of consciousness.

arXiv:1604.06488•Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences•Dec 1, 2015•5 citations

Ontological Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics

Paull Nunez

Ontological questions, concerning the nature of reality, continue to be argued in both the scientific and general literature, and new experiments may be proposed to move ontological questions into the instrumental category for resolution. This chapter contends that all interpretations of quantum mechanics are weird when considered from classical, everyday viewpoints. Readers holding classical world views should not expect to find intuitively-pleasing explanations of quantum mechanics; scientists much smarter than us have failed in this quest over the past century.

Oxford University Press eBooks•Mar 10, 2010•0 citations

Quantum Mechanics: 44 Admissible Questions? -Not only Fapp-

Michele Caponigro, Helen Lynn

The words: determinism, hidden variables, subjectivism, information, objectivism, informational-theoretic axioms,observers have some connection with physical reality? What we mean with "description" of physical reality? When we say that we understand this reality? Certain parameters:position, velocity are sufficient? We will focus only to conceptual considerations regarding the relation between the "questions" and the relative "answers" in general and specifically in quantum mechanics. It is usually believed that the answers are more important of the questions, for this reason we can read many answers everywhere and in different field of knowledge. We need to add and clarify some things: (i) usually an answers require a question, (ii) but, as we know, their relation is not so simple and immediate, (iii) For instance: a)an epistemic questions give us ontic answers? b)the answer has a connection with the question and vice versa? c)we could to infer a question starting from an answer? d)there are answers without questions? These answers could be in some framework considered as ontic answers? The relative scientific works are the same time ontic? Speaking of quantum mechanics we see around many answers in the meantime we do not see the correspondent questions, these answers seem completely independent, and this seem a right road, the road of the independent nature unlinked from human thoughts. We retain instead that questions can affect the possible answers. Exist "something" before the question?

arXiv:quant-ph/0606032•Prespacetime journal•Jun 5, 2006•0 citations

Towards a new interpretation of quantum mechanics?

André Julg, Pierre Julg

Abstract Quantum mechanics is a remarkable formalism for studying problems in the microscopic domain, and nobody has reasonably contested its power. Nevertheless, in spite of the many interpretations which have been proposed, its true meaning is far from being clear. The aim of this preliminary paper is to show that it is possible to conceive within a classical framework an interpretation of quantum mechanics and to make its limits of validity precise.

International Journal of Quantum Chemistry•Feb 1, 1983•4 citations

On the Unavoidability of the Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics

Roberto Beneduci, Franklin E. Schroeck

Recently, the presence in the literature (also recent) of voluminous discussions about the interpretation of quantum mechanics has been labelled as scandalous. We claim that a weak point of the debate which hosted such a conclusion is a lack of a definition of the term "interpretation". In the present note, we would "like to make precise" that meaning and to show how such a clarification is necessary in order to avoid misunderstandings.

arXiv:1211.3883•Nov 16, 2012•0 citations
Summary. The quest for finding the right interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (QM) is as old als QM and still has not ended, and may never end. The question what an interpretation of QM is has hardly ever been raised explicitly, let alone answered. We raise it and answer it. Then the quest for the right interpretation can continue self-consciously, for we then know exactly what we are after. We present a list of minimal requirements that something has to meet in order to qualify as an interpretation of QM. We also raise, as a side issue, the question how the discourse on the interpretation of QM relates to hermeneutics in Continental Philosophy.
The quest for finding the right interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (QM) is as old als QM and still has not ended, and may never end. The question what an interpretation of QM is has hardly ever been raised explicitly, let alone answered. We raise it and answer it. Then the quest for the right interpretation can continue self-consciously, for we then know exactly what we are after. We present a list of minimal requirements that something has to meet in order to qualify as an interpretation of QM. We also raise, as a side issue, the question how the discourse on the interpretation of QM relates to hermeneutics in Continental Philosophy.
Quantum mechanics, the physical theory describing the microworld, is one of science's greatest triumphs. Remarkably, however, after more than 100 years it is still unclear what quantum mechanics means in terms of basic philosophical questions about the nature of reality. While there are many interpretations of the mathematical machinery of quantum physics, there remain no experimental means to distinguish between most of them. In this contribution, I wish to consider the ways in which the enduring lack of an agreed-upon interpretation of quantum physics influences a number of critical philosophical debates about physics and reality. I briefly review two problems affected by quantum interpretations: the meaning of the term universe and the nature of consciousness.
Ontological questions, concerning the nature of reality, continue to be argued in both the scientific and general literature, and new experiments may be proposed to move ontological questions into the instrumental category for resolution. This chapter contends that all interpretations of quantum mechanics are weird when considered from classical, everyday viewpoints. Readers holding classical world views should not expect to find intuitively-pleasing explanations of quantum mechanics; scientists much smarter than us have failed in this quest over the past century.
The words: determinism, hidden variables, subjectivism, information, objectivism, informational-theoretic axioms,observers have some connection with physical reality? What we mean with "description" of physical reality? When we say that we understand this reality? Certain parameters:position, velocity are sufficient? We will focus only to conceptual considerations regarding the relation between the "questions" and the relative "answers" in general and specifically in quantum mechanics. It is usually believed that the answers are more important of the questions, for this reason we can read many answers everywhere and in different field of knowledge. We need to add and clarify some things: (i) usually an answers require a question, (ii) but, as we know, their relation is not so simple and immediate, (iii) For instance: a)an epistemic questions give us ontic answers? b)the answer has a connection with the question and vice versa? c)we could to infer a question starting from an answer? d)there are answers without questions? These answers could be in some framework considered as ontic answers? The relative scientific works are the same time ontic? Speaking of quantum mechanics we see around many answers in the meantime we do not see the correspondent questions, these answers seem completely independent, and this seem a right road, the road of the independent nature unlinked from human thoughts. We retain instead that questions can affect the possible answers. Exist "something" before the question?