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

Foundations of Science

Classicality First: Why Zurek’s Existential Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics Implies Copenhagen

Javier Sánchez Cañizares

Published Dec 3, 2018• 4 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/s10699-018-9574-y

Related papers

Epistemological problems on the Copenhagen interpretations of quantum mechanics

Akio Motoyoshi

Physics reports of the Kumamoto University•Dec 22, 1992•0 citations

Distinguishing the multiverse from an echo: Quantum Mechanics and

Donald Spector

can be understood as a play about the tension between two views of reality, embodied in the Copenhagen and Many Worlds Interpretations of quantum mechanics. To Didi and the audience, the second act seems to be an echo of the first, but an echo implies an original and a copy. In fact, the two acts are on an equal footing, representing parallel versions of the selfsame day. Ultimately, emerges as an exploration of the existential conflict that arises when an adherent of the Copenhagen Interpretation is confronted with a Many Worlds universe.

Samuel Beckett Today / Aujourd’hui•Dec 1, 2008•0 citations

AN EXAMINATION OF THE COPENHAGEN INTERPRETATION OF QUANTUM THEORY

Ramakrishna Puligandla

•Jan 1, 1966•0 citations

Quantum Darwinism and the Existential Interpretation

Wojciech Hubert Zurek

There are two widely known interpretations of quantum theory: Bohr’s Copenhagen interpretation and Everett’s interpretation. The focus of Chapter 9 is to assess, within the context they provide, the interpretation-independent advances discussed in this book. We want to see whether the advances that include decoherence and quantum Darwinism fit these two established and widely known points of view. In fact, it is surprising that (with minor but significant adjustments) decoherence and quantum Darwinism fit very naturally, addressing questions that were recognized as open and important. We then discuss the existential interpretation. It can be seen as a continuation of the Copenhagen interpretation, with the Universe consisting of quantum and classical realms, but with classicality that is emergent, rather than preordained. It is also compatible with Everett’s interpretation, since quantum states and evolutions are all that is needed. However, unlike the Many Worlds interpretation (which regards the quantum state of the Universe as objectively existing, akin to a classical point in phase space or a classical electromagnetic field), the existential interpretation recognizes that quantum states combine information and existence—they are epiontic. The mix of existence and information they represent fits the relative states reading of Everett’s approach.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Mar 6, 2025•0 citations

THIS ELUSIVE OBJECTIVE EXISTENCE

Ulrich Mohrhoff

Zurek's existential interpretation of quantum mechanics suffers from three classical prejudices, including the belief that space and time are intrinsically and infinitely differentiated. These compel him to relativize the concept of objective existence in two ways. The elimination of these prejudices makes it possible to recognize the quantum formalism's ontological implications — the relative and contingent reality of spatiotemporal distinctions and the extrinsic and finite spatiotemporal differentiation of the physical world — which in turn makes it possible to arrive at an unqualified objective existence. Contrary to a widespread misconception, viewing the quantum formalism as being fundamentally a probability algorithm does not imply that quantum mechanics is concerned with states of knowledge rather than states of Nature. On the contrary, it makes possible a complete and strongly objective description of the physical world that requires no reference to observers. What objectively exists, in a sense that requires no qualification, is (i) the trajectories of macroscopic objects, whose fuzziness is empirically irrelevant, (ii) the properties and values of whose possession these trajectories provide indelible records, and (iii) the fuzzy and temporally undifferentiated states of affairs that obtain between measurements and are described by counterfactual probability assignments.

arXiv:quant-ph/0401179•International Journal of Quantum Information•Jun 1, 2004•11 citations

The “Copenhagen Interpretation” of Quantum Mechanics and Phenomenology

Ragnar Fjelland

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 2002•5 citations
can be understood as a play about the tension between two views of reality, embodied in the Copenhagen and Many Worlds Interpretations of quantum mechanics. To Didi and the audience, the second act seems to be an echo of the first, but an echo implies an original and a copy. In fact, the two acts are on an equal footing, representing parallel versions of the selfsame day. Ultimately, emerges as an exploration of the existential conflict that arises when an adherent of the Copenhagen Interpretation is confronted with a Many Worlds universe.
There are two widely known interpretations of quantum theory: Bohr’s Copenhagen interpretation and Everett’s interpretation. The focus of Chapter 9 is to assess, within the context they provide, the interpretation-independent advances discussed in this book. We want to see whether the advances that include decoherence and quantum Darwinism fit these two established and widely known points of view. In fact, it is surprising that (with minor but significant adjustments) decoherence and quantum Darwinism fit very naturally, addressing questions that were recognized as open and important. We then discuss the existential interpretation. It can be seen as a continuation of the Copenhagen interpretation, with the Universe consisting of quantum and classical realms, but with classicality that is emergent, rather than preordained. It is also compatible with Everett’s interpretation, since quantum states and evolutions are all that is needed. However, unlike the Many Worlds interpretation (which regards the quantum state of the Universe as objectively existing, akin to a classical point in phase space or a classical electromagnetic field), the existential interpretation recognizes that quantum states combine information and existence—they are epiontic. The mix of existence and information they represent fits the relative states reading of Everett’s approach.
Zurek's existential interpretation of quantum mechanics suffers from three classical prejudices, including the belief that space and time are intrinsically and infinitely differentiated. These compel him to relativize the concept of objective existence in two ways. The elimination of these prejudices makes it possible to recognize the quantum formalism's ontological implications — the relative and contingent reality of spatiotemporal distinctions and the extrinsic and finite spatiotemporal differentiation of the physical world — which in turn makes it possible to arrive at an unqualified objective existence. Contrary to a widespread misconception, viewing the quantum formalism as being fundamentally a probability algorithm does not imply that quantum mechanics is concerned with states of knowledge rather than states of Nature. On the contrary, it makes possible a complete and strongly objective description of the physical world that requires no reference to observers. What objectively exists, in a sense that requires no qualification, is (i) the trajectories of macroscopic objects, whose fuzziness is empirically irrelevant, (ii) the properties and values of whose possession these trajectories provide indelible records, and (iii) the fuzzy and temporally undifferentiated states of affairs that obtain between measurements and are described by counterfactual probability assignments.