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

Quantum Objects

Alireza Mansouri, Mehdi Golshani, Amir Ehsan Karbasizadeh

Published May 29, 2013• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

In this paper, we suggest an alternative interpretation for the quantum state vector, which, by considering temporal parts for physical objects, aims to give an intelligible account of measurement problem in quantum mechanics. We examine the capacity of this interpretation as for explaining three measurement problems: the problem of outcome, the problem of statistics and the problem of effect. We argue that, this interpretation of the state vector, while providing a satisfactory account, as rationally plausible as its rivals, for the measurement problem, shows yet another limitation of our perceptual experience, i.e. our inability to perceive unsharp reality.

Related papers

Quantum Objects

Alireza Mansouri, Mehdi Golshani, Amir Ehsan Karbasizadeh

In this paper, we suggest an alternative interpretation for the quantum state vector, which, by considering temporal parts for physical objects, aims to give an intelligible account of measurement problem in quantum mechanics. We examine the capacity of this interpretation as for explaining three measurement problems: the problem of outcome, the problem of statistics and the problem of effect. We argue that, this interpretation of the state vector, while providing a satisfactory account, as rationally plausible as its rivals, for the measurement problem, shows yet another limitation of our perceptual experience, i.e. our inability to perceive unsharp reality

•Jun 2, 2012•0 citations

Quantum Objects

Alireza Mansouri, Mehdi Golshani, Amir Ehsan Karbasizadeh

In this paper, we suggest an alternative interpretation for the quantum state vector, which, by considering temporal parts for physical objects, aims to give an intelligible account of measurement problem in quantum mechanics. We examine the capacity of this interpretation as for explaining three measurement problems: the problem of outcome, the problem of statistics and the problem of effect. We argue that, this interpretation of the state vector, while providing a satisfactory account, as rationally plausible as its rivals, for the measurement problem, shows yet another limitation of our perceptual experience, i.e. our inability to perceive unsharp reality.

arXiv:1305.6940•May 29, 2013•0 citations

Quantum Objects: Sigma Interpretation for Measurement Problem

a Mansouri, m Golshani, ae Karbasizadeh

In this paper, we suggest an alternative interpretation for the state vector which, by considering temporal parts for physical objects, aims to give an intelligible account of measurement problem in quantum mechanics. This interpretation, it is claimed, has the capacity to solve three measurement problems: the problem of outcome, the problem of statistics and the problem of effect. We argue that it not only provides us with an account of measurement problem but also shows us yet another limitation of our perceptual experience, i.e. our inability to perceive unsharp reality.

•Mar 1, 2012•0 citations

How to Be a Copenhagenistic-QBistic Everettist

Marcin Wieśniak

The measurement problem in quantum mechanics (QM) is related to the inability to include learning about the properties of a quantum system by an agent in the formalism of quantum theory. It includes questions about the physical processes behind the measurement, uniqueness, and randomness of obtained outcomes and an ontic or epistemic role of the state. These issues have triggered various interpretations of quantum theory. They vary from refusing any connection between physical reality and a measurement process to insisting that a collapse of the wave-function is real and possibly involves consciousness. On the other hand, the actual mechanism of a measurement is not extensively discussed in these interpretations. This essay attempts to investigate the quantum measurement problem from the position of the scientific consensus. We begin with a short overview of the development of sensing in living organisms. This is performed for the purpose of stressing the relation between reality and our experience. We then briefly present different approaches to the measurement problem in chosen interpretations. We then state three philosophical assumptions for further consideration and present a decomposition of the measurement act into four stages: transformation, conversion, amplification and broadcasting, and, finally, perception. Each of these stages provides an intuition about the physical processes contributing to it. These conclusions are then used in a discussion about, e.g., objectivity, the implausibility of reversing a measurement, or the epistemic status of the wave-function. Finally, we argue that those in favor of some of the most popular interpretations can find an overlap between their beliefs and the consequences of considerations presented here.

Entropy•Feb 27, 2025•0 citations

Measurement Problem: A Prediction Problem in Quantum Mechanics and Classical Physics

Franz Klaus Jansen

Quantum mechanics is based on Schrodinger’s wave function with linear superposition of vectors in a Hilbert space. Due to superposition, multiple physical states are considered simultaneously for the same time point, but when the corresponding quantum mechanical experiments are realized, there is only one outcome and not a superposition of pointer positions. This observation characterizes the quantum mechanical measurement problem, which for about a century found multiple interpretations, which can be classified as potentiality, as proposed by Heisenberg, or as real physical entities, for instance fields. Potentialities are yet inexistent in reality and unobservable in the present, since they represent a possible future. Thus, they can only be an intra-mental representation of a future process and not a physical extra-mental process ongoing in the present. There is coexistence of a physical object observable in reality and a mental prediction by an observer concerning the future behavior of this object. The characterization of quantum mechanical formalism by some physicists corresponds to a prediction and therefore to a mental representation of the future behavior of elementary particles and not to a description of an ongoing extra-mental process. Prediction in life and science has some characteristics, which resemble the measurement problem, since it undergoes a “multiple to one” reduction of mental potentialities to only one observable real outcome. Besides quantum mechanics, such reductions can also be found with many kinds of predictions, in classical physics for regular and irregular dynamical processes and in humans for programming future actions. Superposition in classical physics only concerns variable effects, but in quantum mechanics includes variable effects and non-localizable causes. Quantum mechanics, interpreted as prediction of future outcomes with multiple potentialities but only one realization, would resemble the general prediction problem in life and science and thereby loos its weird aspects.

NeuroQuantology•Oct 16, 2015•4 citations

Measurement Problem and Non-Locality: An Alternative Interpretation

Pierre C. Sabatier

The Measurement problem and Non-locality are classical problems in Quantum Mechanics and still unsolved in spite of the many proposed solutions. A new interpretation is proposed here, based on the idea that they are closely related problems. But it requires that we consider space and time not as objective mediums but as features of our representation of reality, as Kant explained more than two centuries ago.

Open Journal of Philosophy•Dec 23, 2024•0 citations
In this paper, we suggest an alternative interpretation for the quantum state vector, which, by considering temporal parts for physical objects, aims to give an intelligible account of measurement problem in quantum mechanics. We examine the capacity of this interpretation as for explaining three measurement problems: the problem of outcome, the problem of statistics and the problem of effect. We argue that, this interpretation of the state vector, while providing a satisfactory account, as rationally plausible as its rivals, for the measurement problem, shows yet another limitation of our perceptual experience, i.e. our inability to perceive unsharp reality.
In this paper, we suggest an alternative interpretation for the quantum state vector, which, by considering temporal parts for physical objects, aims to give an intelligible account of measurement problem in quantum mechanics. We examine the capacity of this interpretation as for explaining three measurement problems: the problem of outcome, the problem of statistics and the problem of effect. We argue that, this interpretation of the state vector, while providing a satisfactory account, as rationally plausible as its rivals, for the measurement problem, shows yet another limitation of our perceptual experience, i.e. our inability to perceive unsharp reality
In this paper, we suggest an alternative interpretation for the quantum state vector, which, by considering temporal parts for physical objects, aims to give an intelligible account of measurement problem in quantum mechanics. We examine the capacity of this interpretation as for explaining three measurement problems: the problem of outcome, the problem of statistics and the problem of effect. We argue that, this interpretation of the state vector, while providing a satisfactory account, as rationally plausible as its rivals, for the measurement problem, shows yet another limitation of our perceptual experience, i.e. our inability to perceive unsharp reality.
In this paper, we suggest an alternative interpretation for the state vector which, by considering temporal parts for physical objects, aims to give an intelligible account of measurement problem in quantum mechanics. This interpretation, it is claimed, has the capacity to solve three measurement problems: the problem of outcome, the problem of statistics and the problem of effect. We argue that it not only provides us with an account of measurement problem but also shows us yet another limitation of our perceptual experience, i.e. our inability to perceive unsharp reality.
The measurement problem in quantum mechanics (QM) is related to the inability to include learning about the properties of a quantum system by an agent in the formalism of quantum theory. It includes questions about the physical processes behind the measurement, uniqueness, and randomness of obtained outcomes and an ontic or epistemic role of the state. These issues have triggered various interpretations of quantum theory. They vary from refusing any connection between physical reality and a measurement process to insisting that a collapse of the wave-function is real and possibly involves consciousness. On the other hand, the actual mechanism of a measurement is not extensively discussed in these interpretations. This essay attempts to investigate the quantum measurement problem from the position of the scientific consensus. We begin with a short overview of the development of sensing in living organisms. This is performed for the purpose of stressing the relation between reality and our experience. We then briefly present different approaches to the measurement problem in chosen interpretations. We then state three philosophical assumptions for further consideration and present a decomposition of the measurement act into four stages: transformation, conversion, amplification and broadcasting, and, finally, perception. Each of these stages provides an intuition about the physical processes contributing to it. These conclusions are then used in a discussion about, e.g., objectivity, the implausibility of reversing a measurement, or the epistemic status of the wave-function. Finally, we argue that those in favor of some of the most popular interpretations can find an overlap between their beliefs and the consequences of considerations presented here.
Quantum mechanics is based on Schrodinger’s wave function with linear superposition of vectors in a Hilbert space. Due to superposition, multiple physical states are considered simultaneously for the same time point, but when the corresponding quantum mechanical experiments are realized, there is only one outcome and not a superposition of pointer positions. This observation characterizes the quantum mechanical measurement problem, which for about a century found multiple interpretations, which can be classified as potentiality, as proposed by Heisenberg, or as real physical entities, for instance fields. Potentialities are yet inexistent in reality and unobservable in the present, since they represent a possible future. Thus, they can only be an intra-mental representation of a future process and not a physical extra-mental process ongoing in the present. There is coexistence of a physical object observable in reality and a mental prediction by an observer concerning the future behavior of this object. The characterization of quantum mechanical formalism by some physicists corresponds to a prediction and therefore to a mental representation of the future behavior of elementary particles and not to a description of an ongoing extra-mental process. Prediction in life and science has some characteristics, which resemble the measurement problem, since it undergoes a “multiple to one” reduction of mental potentialities to only one observable real outcome. Besides quantum mechanics, such reductions can also be found with many kinds of predictions, in classical physics for regular and irregular dynamical processes and in humans for programming future actions. Superposition in classical physics only concerns variable effects, but in quantum mechanics includes variable effects and non-localizable causes. Quantum mechanics, interpreted as prediction of future outcomes with multiple potentialities but only one realization, would resemble the general prediction problem in life and science and thereby loos its weird aspects.