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

International Journal of Quantum Information

Quantum world return to a realistic view

J. R. Croca

Published Dec 1, 2017• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Orthodox quantum mechanics, or at least some extreme interpretations of it, adopts a nonrealistic stance by assuming, in its fifth, or reduction postulate, that Reality is, in last instance, a making of the observer consciousness. The enormous empirical success of orthodox quantum mechanics lead most of the scientific community to accept without reserve this highly idealistic posture even without fully realizing its deep implications. Now, almost a century after its formulation, a return to a realistic view of Physics seems possible.

DOI
10.1142/s0219749917400238

Related papers

Why engineers are right to avoid the quantum reality offered by the orthodox theory? [point of view]

Xavier Oriols, David K. Ferry

We are currently in the middle of a second quantum revolution where the rules discovered a century ago to understand the quantum world are being applied to develop new quantum technologies [1]. Yet, most of the understanding of quantum physics is developed from the orthodox (also known as the Copenhagen) interpretation of the quantum phenomena [2], [3]. However, the orthodox theory has important difficulties in providing an intuitive view of quantum technologies because it states that a quantum object has only real properties when it is measured by an observer. This view of the reality of quantum objects is unnatural to engineers and, thus, is ignored by them when analyzing their realworld devices. What is natural to engineers is to imagine that the reality of an object (their properties) is independent of whether the object is measured or not.

arXiv:2402.06851•Proceedings of the IEEE•May 18, 2021•17 citations

Scientific Realism and the Quantum

French, Steven, Saatsi, Juha

Scientific realism has traditionally maintained that our best scientific theories can be regarded as more or less true and as representing the world as it is (more or less). However, one of our very best current theories—quantum mechanics—has famously resisted such a realist construal, threatening to undermine the realist stance altogether. The chapters in this volume carefully examine this tension and the reasons behind it, including the underdetermination generated by the multiplicity of formulations and interpretations of quantum physics, each presenting a different way the world could be. Authors in this volume offer a range of alternative ways forward: some suggest new articulations of realism, limiting our commitments in one way or another; others attempt to articulate a ‘third way’ between traditional forms of realism and antirealism, or are critical of such attempts. Still others argue that quantum theory itself should be reconceptualised, or at least alternative formulations should be considered in the hope of evading the problems faced by realism. And some examine the nature of these issues when moving beyond quantum mechanics to quantum field theory. Taken together they offer an exciting new set of perspectives on one of the most fundamental questions in the philosophy of modern physics: how can one be a realist about quantum theory, and what does this realism amount to?

Oxford University Press eBooks•Feb 27, 2020•62 citations

Introduction and overview

Stephen L. Adler

Quantum mechanics is our most successful physical theory. It underlies our very detailed understanding of atomic physics, chemistry, and nuclear physics, and the many technologies to which physical systems in these regimes give rise. Additionally, relativistic quantum mechanics is the basis for the standard model of elementary particles, which very successfully gives a partial unification of the forces operating at the atomic, nuclear, and subnuclear levels. However, from its inception the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics, and the fact that “quantum measurements” in the orthodox formulation appear to require the intervention of non-quantum mechanical “classical systems,” have led to speculations by many physicists, mathematicians, and philosophers of science that quantum mechanics may be incomplete. Among the Founding Fathers of quantum theory, Einstein and Schrödinger were both of the opinion that quantum mechanics is in some way unsatisfactory, and this view has been amplified in more recent profound work of John Bell, among others. In an opposing camp, many others in the physics, mathematics, and philosophy communities have attempted to provide an interpretational foundation in which quantum mechanics remains a complete and self-contained system. Among the Founding Fathers, Bohr, Born, and Heisenberg maintained that quantum mechanics is a complete system, and a number of recent proposals have been made to improve upon or to provide alternatives to their “Copenhagen Interpretation.” The debate continues, and has spawned an enormous literature.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Aug 26, 2004•2 citations

Bohr and Evolutionary Relativism

Gonzalo Munévar

The surprising thing is that the most successful scientific field of the century is quantum physics, and quantum physics in its most orthodox interpretation is decidedly anti-realist. At least that is what Niels Bohr, the foremost thinker in the field, said explicitly: "an independent reality in the ordinary physical sense can neither be ascribed to the phenomena nor to the agencies of observation." Many philosophers, however, would cringe at the thought that any form of relativism may be considered sensible. Their support for realism stems in part from the belief that the alternative to realism is relativism and that relativism is incoherent. Likewise at the level of science, a view may allow the bat such striking success in dealing with certain difficult questions that the bat adopts it as his means of viewing that entire area of experience.

Routledge eBooks•Aug 21, 2018•0 citations

Quantum mechanics, by itself, implies perception of a classical world

Casey Blood

arXiv:1009.4614•Sep 23, 2010•1 citation

Tachyons Particles as a Paradigm for the Existing of the Status of Quantum Metaphysics

Kahsu Abrha Belew

As many scientists wrote repeatedly, quantum mechanics is a naturalistic theory and it flourished in 1920s, so as to solve physical problems through empirical experiment. It is the most vivacious empirical science to explain cosmological puzzles for the last one hundred years consistently. Philosophers of physics evidently argue that the nature of quantum mechanics (sometimes so-called quantum theory or physics) in physics can be associated with the coming of logical positivism (empiricist philosophy) on the philosophy segment. As history of physics showed quantum physics is a one among the many scientific theories which is the most fruitful and applied over. Though scientists were raised intentionally or unintentionally metaphysical questions, but they applied quantum mechanical stance. Accordingly, till 20 th c physicists were simply defending on experiment based reality only (but failed)! However, mid-20 th century later theoretical physicists have changed this experimental physics and it follows revolutionized science. Therefore, there was a paradigm shift from the quantum mechanics stance to quantum metaphysics posture because the revolution in physics is not only to review and reading about the physical world, but also the world of metaphysics too. Thus, in modern societies, a strange and new theoretical quantum science was developed in 1967’s by Gerald Feinberg, so called quantum metaphysics which can justify through Tachyon particles so as to realize metaphysical mien. Based on quantum physics postures, Feinberg puts forward an assumption of quantum metaphysics and Tachkyonic particles in general. Keywords: Quantum Physics, Physics, Metaphysics, Quantum Metaphysics, Tachyons, Feinberg DOI : 10.7176/APTA/82-02 Publication date: January 31 st 2020

Advances in physics theories and applications•Jan 1, 2020•0 citations
Orthodox quantum mechanics, or at least some extreme interpretations of it, adopts a nonrealistic stance by assuming, in its fifth, or reduction postulate, that Reality is, in last instance, a making of the observer consciousness. The enormous empirical success of orthodox quantum mechanics lead most of the scientific community to accept without reserve this highly idealistic posture even without fully realizing its deep implications. Now, almost a century after its formulation, a return to a realistic view of Physics seems possible.
We are currently in the middle of a second quantum revolution where the rules discovered a century ago to understand the quantum world are being applied to develop new quantum technologies [1]. Yet, most of the understanding of quantum physics is developed from the orthodox (also known as the Copenhagen) interpretation of the quantum phenomena [2], [3]. However, the orthodox theory has important difficulties in providing an intuitive view of quantum technologies because it states that a quantum object has only real properties when it is measured by an observer. This view of the reality of quantum objects is unnatural to engineers and, thus, is ignored by them when analyzing their realworld devices. What is natural to engineers is to imagine that the reality of an object (their properties) is independent of whether the object is measured or not.
Scientific realism has traditionally maintained that our best scientific theories can be regarded as more or less true and as representing the world as it is (more or less). However, one of our very best current theories—quantum mechanics—has famously resisted such a realist construal, threatening to undermine the realist stance altogether. The chapters in this volume carefully examine this tension and the reasons behind it, including the underdetermination generated by the multiplicity of formulations and interpretations of quantum physics, each presenting a different way the world could be. Authors in this volume offer a range of alternative ways forward: some suggest new articulations of realism, limiting our commitments in one way or another; others attempt to articulate a ‘third way’ between traditional forms of realism and antirealism, or are critical of such attempts. Still others argue that quantum theory itself should be reconceptualised, or at least alternative formulations should be considered in the hope of evading the problems faced by realism. And some examine the nature of these issues when moving beyond quantum mechanics to quantum field theory. Taken together they offer an exciting new set of perspectives on one of the most fundamental questions in the philosophy of modern physics: how can one be a realist about quantum theory, and what does this realism amount to?
Quantum mechanics is our most successful physical theory. It underlies our very detailed understanding of atomic physics, chemistry, and nuclear physics, and the many technologies to which physical systems in these regimes give rise. Additionally, relativistic quantum mechanics is the basis for the standard model of elementary particles, which very successfully gives a partial unification of the forces operating at the atomic, nuclear, and subnuclear levels. However, from its inception the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics, and the fact that “quantum measurements” in the orthodox formulation appear to require the intervention of non-quantum mechanical “classical systems,” have led to speculations by many physicists, mathematicians, and philosophers of science that quantum mechanics may be incomplete. Among the Founding Fathers of quantum theory, Einstein and Schrödinger were both of the opinion that quantum mechanics is in some way unsatisfactory, and this view has been amplified in more recent profound work of John Bell, among others. In an opposing camp, many others in the physics, mathematics, and philosophy communities have attempted to provide an interpretational foundation in which quantum mechanics remains a complete and self-contained system. Among the Founding Fathers, Bohr, Born, and Heisenberg maintained that quantum mechanics is a complete system, and a number of recent proposals have been made to improve upon or to provide alternatives to their “Copenhagen Interpretation.” The debate continues, and has spawned an enormous literature.
The surprising thing is that the most successful scientific field of the century is quantum physics, and quantum physics in its most orthodox interpretation is decidedly anti-realist. At least that is what Niels Bohr, the foremost thinker in the field, said explicitly: "an independent reality in the ordinary physical sense can neither be ascribed to the phenomena nor to the agencies of observation." Many philosophers, however, would cringe at the thought that any form of relativism may be considered sensible. Their support for realism stems in part from the belief that the alternative to realism is relativism and that relativism is incoherent. Likewise at the level of science, a view may allow the bat such striking success in dealing with certain difficult questions that the bat adopts it as his means of viewing that entire area of experience.
As many scientists wrote repeatedly, quantum mechanics is a naturalistic theory and it flourished in 1920s, so as to solve physical problems through empirical experiment. It is the most vivacious empirical science to explain cosmological puzzles for the last one hundred years consistently. Philosophers of physics evidently argue that the nature of quantum mechanics (sometimes so-called quantum theory or physics) in physics can be associated with the coming of logical positivism (empiricist philosophy) on the philosophy segment. As history of physics showed quantum physics is a one among the many scientific theories which is the most fruitful and applied over. Though scientists were raised intentionally or unintentionally metaphysical questions, but they applied quantum mechanical stance. Accordingly, till 20 th c physicists were simply defending on experiment based reality only (but failed)! However, mid-20 th century later theoretical physicists have changed this experimental physics and it follows revolutionized science. Therefore, there was a paradigm shift from the quantum mechanics stance to quantum metaphysics posture because the revolution in physics is not only to review and reading about the physical world, but also the world of metaphysics too. Thus, in modern societies, a strange and new theoretical quantum science was developed in 1967’s by Gerald Feinberg, so called quantum metaphysics which can justify through Tachyon particles so as to realize metaphysical mien. Based on quantum physics postures, Feinberg puts forward an assumption of quantum metaphysics and Tachkyonic particles in general. Keywords: Quantum Physics, Physics, Metaphysics, Quantum Metaphysics, Tachyons, Feinberg DOI : 10.7176/APTA/82-02 Publication date: January 31 st 2020