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

The Meaning of Death (No Entity Has Pre-Existing Values in the Physical World)

Sunil Thakur

Published Apr 1, 2019• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

Classical physics assumes that the things exist independently of an act of observation; however, quantum theory suggests that the apparent form of quantum system emerges as a consequence of an act of observation. However, quantum theory is silent on the state of the systems prior to the act of observation. It assumes that the wavefunction collapses as a consequence of an act of observation but does not explain the mechanism of the collapse of wavefunction. Therefore, it is at least incomplete, if not incorrect. In this paper, we have shown that the apparent form of entities emerges as a consequence of an act of observation even in the macro world. We have shown that all the entities exist in non-physical form. The wavefunction of an entity is the sum of all the properties the entity may manifest in the physical world. The wavefunction remains unaffected by an act of observation. The apparent form of the observed entity depends as much on the observer as it does on the entity being observed. We have also explained the scientific meaning and significance of death.

Related papers

Can We Have an Observer-Independent Description of Physical Reality?

Sunil Thakur

Classical physics assumes that the things exist independently of an act of observation; however, quantum theory suggests that the apparent form of quantum system emerges as a consequence of an act of observation. However, quantum theory is silent on the state of the systems prior to the act of observation. It assumes that the wavefunction collapses as a consequence of an act of observation but does not explain the mechanism of the collapse of wavefunction. Therefore, it is at least incomplete, if not incorrect. In this paper, we have shown that our understanding of the nature of physical reality is based on the false premise that we observe the physical entities, but the mechanism of perception is such that we can only perceive the information generated by the physical entities, not the physical entities. As per the current understanding of the process of perception, the brain projects the information it receives from the sense organs in the physical forms. Therefore, the entity that generates the information must preexist before it can be projected in the physical form. We do not perceive the actual Moon. The apparent form of the Moon is only a projection created by our brain. The apparent form is only a manifestation of something that generates information, but that cannot be observed directly. In the light of this observation, it becomes necessary to examine if we can establish causal relationships between events assuming that the place and time and events are observer independent. Apart from using the criterion prescribed by the EPR paper, we have also used these two methods to determine if we can have an observer independent description of reality. We have shown that an entity must have observer independent values of the physical quantities, but the act of measurement only reveals the observer dependent values of the physical quantities even in the macro world. We have confirmed our observations experimentally as well as through the observation of the natural phenomena.

•Apr 1, 2019•0 citations

Schrodinger’s Cat is Neither Alive Nor Dead

Sunil Thakur

In this paper, we have analyzed a movie recorded by a team from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to show that the quantum states are real, but not physical. We have then analyzed some natural phenomena to show that this observation applies to all the physical entities. Physical form is only a manifestation of a non-physical entity that has its own unique set of potential properties that it can manifest in physical form. The manifestation of the physical entities is observer dependent. An act of observation manifests a physical entity; it does not create it. We have also shown that we live in a non-physical world in which all the phenomena are mere manifestations.

•Mar 1, 2019•0 citations

The Nature of Physical Reality

Sunil Thakur

In this paradigm shifting paper, we show that the physical world is manifestation of a non-physical objective reality that exists absolutely, manifests relatively, and behaves relationally. We show that all the phenomena observed in the quantum world manifest themselves more eloquently even in the macro world. Things do not have any pre-existing values even in the macro world, but things do have predictable values even in the quantum world.

CSIRO Publishing eBooks•Oct 11, 2007•2 citations

Why Quantum Collapse May Not Be Fundamental

Atsushi Okamoto

Wave function collapse has long been regarded as a fundamental element of the quantum measurement process, providing a mechanism by which a superposed quantum state yields a single observed outcome. Despite its widespread use, the physical meaning of collapse remains conceptually controversial. In particular, it is often assumed that the quantities associated with a quantum state before measurement and the values obtained after measurement belong to the same conceptual category. This assumption leads naturally to the image of a discontinuous transition in which one value is selected from a superposition of possibilities. In the present work, we reexamine the concept of quantum collapse from the perspective of observability. We argue that pre-measurement quantities do not constitute observable values in the ordinary operational sense. Rather, they represent a structure of potential observability associated with possible measurement outcomes. By contrast, post-measurement outcomes correspond to operationally realized observability, in which a specific result becomes accessible through measurement. From this viewpoint, the apparent collapse does not represent a physical jump of an already existing value, but a transition from potential observability to operationally realized observability. Based on this distinction, we propose that many conceptual difficulties traditionally associated with wave function collapse arise from treating these two fundamentally different forms of observability as if they were physically equivalent. The apparent discontinuity of collapse may therefore originate not from a discontinuous change in reality itself, but from a conceptual conflation of potential observability and operationally realized observability. Within the Intrinsic Observability Framework (IOF), this interpretation naturally leads to the concept of accessibility transition, in which the emergence of a definite outcome is understood as a change in accessible structure rather than as a fundamental non-unitary state reduction. The present analysis suggests that wave function collapse may not be a fundamental physical phenomenon, but instead a consequence of the transition from potential observability to operationally realized observability. This perspective provides a conceptual reorganization of the measurement problem and clarifies the role of observability in the emergence of definite quantum outcomes.

•Jul 11, 2026•0 citations

Collapse Theories

Peter J. Lewis

The collapse postulate in quantum mechanics is problematic. In standard presentations of the theory, the state of a system prior to a measurement is a sum of terms, with one term representing each possible outcome of the measurement. Many dynamical collapse theories imply that the quantum wavefunction is fundamental, and that particles are just a temporary “bunching up” of the fundamental wave-like entity. Quantum mechanics is often taken to be an indeterministic theory. Quantum mechanics represents the state of a system in various ways, but the representation that is most perspicuous for understanding collapse theories uses a wavefunction. Consistency with special relativity is, therefore, a problem for dynamical collapse theories, but perhaps not an insuperable one. Some have argued that the wavefunction needs to be supplemented to counteract the effects of the novel quantum vagueness introduced by dynamical collapse theories. The ontological consequences of dynamical collapse theories remain an area of active debate.

Routledge eBooks•Aug 11, 2021•1 citation

Realism and the wavefunction

A. Matzkin

Realism - the idea that the concepts in physical theories refer to `things' existing in the real world - is introduced as a tool to analyse the status of the wavefunction. Although the physical entities are recognized by the existence of invariant quantities, examples from classical and quantum physics suggest that not all the theoretical terms refer to the entities: some terms refer to properties of the entities, and some terms have only an epistemic function. In particular, it is argued that the wavefunction may be written in terms of classical non-referring and epistemic terms. The implications for realist interpretations of quantum mechanics and on the teaching of quantum physics are examined.

arXiv:quant-ph/0208018•European Journal of Physics•May 1, 2002•15 citations
Classical physics assumes that the things exist independently of an act of observation; however, quantum theory suggests that the apparent form of quantum system emerges as a consequence of an act of observation. However, quantum theory is silent on the state of the systems prior to the act of observation. It assumes that the wavefunction collapses as a consequence of an act of observation but does not explain the mechanism of the collapse of wavefunction. Therefore, it is at least incomplete, if not incorrect. In this paper, we have shown that the apparent form of entities emerges as a consequence of an act of observation even in the macro world. We have shown that all the entities exist in non-physical form. The wavefunction of an entity is the sum of all the properties the entity may manifest in the physical world. The wavefunction remains unaffected by an act of observation. The apparent form of the observed entity depends as much on the observer as it does on the entity being observed. We have also explained the scientific meaning and significance of death.
Classical physics assumes that the things exist independently of an act of observation; however, quantum theory suggests that the apparent form of quantum system emerges as a consequence of an act of observation. However, quantum theory is silent on the state of the systems prior to the act of observation. It assumes that the wavefunction collapses as a consequence of an act of observation but does not explain the mechanism of the collapse of wavefunction. Therefore, it is at least incomplete, if not incorrect. In this paper, we have shown that our understanding of the nature of physical reality is based on the false premise that we observe the physical entities, but the mechanism of perception is such that we can only perceive the information generated by the physical entities, not the physical entities. As per the current understanding of the process of perception, the brain projects the information it receives from the sense organs in the physical forms. Therefore, the entity that generates the information must preexist before it can be projected in the physical form. We do not perceive the actual Moon. The apparent form of the Moon is only a projection created by our brain. The apparent form is only a manifestation of something that generates information, but that cannot be observed directly. In the light of this observation, it becomes necessary to examine if we can establish causal relationships between events assuming that the place and time and events are observer independent. Apart from using the criterion prescribed by the EPR paper, we have also used these two methods to determine if we can have an observer independent description of reality. We have shown that an entity must have observer independent values of the physical quantities, but the act of measurement only reveals the observer dependent values of the physical quantities even in the macro world. We have confirmed our observations experimentally as well as through the observation of the natural phenomena.
In this paper, we have analyzed a movie recorded by a team from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to show that the quantum states are real, but not physical. We have then analyzed some natural phenomena to show that this observation applies to all the physical entities. Physical form is only a manifestation of a non-physical entity that has its own unique set of potential properties that it can manifest in physical form. The manifestation of the physical entities is observer dependent. An act of observation manifests a physical entity; it does not create it. We have also shown that we live in a non-physical world in which all the phenomena are mere manifestations.
Wave function collapse has long been regarded as a fundamental element of the quantum measurement process, providing a mechanism by which a superposed quantum state yields a single observed outcome. Despite its widespread use, the physical meaning of collapse remains conceptually controversial. In particular, it is often assumed that the quantities associated with a quantum state before measurement and the values obtained after measurement belong to the same conceptual category. This assumption leads naturally to the image of a discontinuous transition in which one value is selected from a superposition of possibilities. In the present work, we reexamine the concept of quantum collapse from the perspective of observability. We argue that pre-measurement quantities do not constitute observable values in the ordinary operational sense. Rather, they represent a structure of potential observability associated with possible measurement outcomes. By contrast, post-measurement outcomes correspond to operationally realized observability, in which a specific result becomes accessible through measurement. From this viewpoint, the apparent collapse does not represent a physical jump of an already existing value, but a transition from potential observability to operationally realized observability. Based on this distinction, we propose that many conceptual difficulties traditionally associated with wave function collapse arise from treating these two fundamentally different forms of observability as if they were physically equivalent. The apparent discontinuity of collapse may therefore originate not from a discontinuous change in reality itself, but from a conceptual conflation of potential observability and operationally realized observability. Within the Intrinsic Observability Framework (IOF), this interpretation naturally leads to the concept of accessibility transition, in which the emergence of a definite outcome is understood as a change in accessible structure rather than as a fundamental non-unitary state reduction. The present analysis suggests that wave function collapse may not be a fundamental physical phenomenon, but instead a consequence of the transition from potential observability to operationally realized observability. This perspective provides a conceptual reorganization of the measurement problem and clarifies the role of observability in the emergence of definite quantum outcomes.
The collapse postulate in quantum mechanics is problematic. In standard presentations of the theory, the state of a system prior to a measurement is a sum of terms, with one term representing each possible outcome of the measurement. Many dynamical collapse theories imply that the quantum wavefunction is fundamental, and that particles are just a temporary “bunching up” of the fundamental wave-like entity. Quantum mechanics is often taken to be an indeterministic theory. Quantum mechanics represents the state of a system in various ways, but the representation that is most perspicuous for understanding collapse theories uses a wavefunction. Consistency with special relativity is, therefore, a problem for dynamical collapse theories, but perhaps not an insuperable one. Some have argued that the wavefunction needs to be supplemented to counteract the effects of the novel quantum vagueness introduced by dynamical collapse theories. The ontological consequences of dynamical collapse theories remain an area of active debate.
Realism - the idea that the concepts in physical theories refer to `things' existing in the real world - is introduced as a tool to analyse the status of the wavefunction. Although the physical entities are recognized by the existence of invariant quantities, examples from classical and quantum physics suggest that not all the theoretical terms refer to the entities: some terms refer to properties of the entities, and some terms have only an epistemic function. In particular, it is argued that the wavefunction may be written in terms of classical non-referring and epistemic terms. The implications for realist interpretations of quantum mechanics and on the teaching of quantum physics are examined.