Abstract. No consensus seems to exist as to what constitutes a measurement which is still considered somewhat mysterious in many respects in quantum mechanics. At successive stages mathematical theory of measure, metrology and measurement theory tried to systematize this field but significant questions remain open about the nature of measurement, about the characterization of the observer, about the reliability of measurement processes etc. The present paper attempts to talk about these questions through the information science. We start from the idea, rather common and intuitive, that the measurement process basically acquires information. Next we expand this idea through four formal definitions and infer some corollaries regarding the measurement process from those definitions. Relativity emerges as the basic property of measurement from the present logical framework and this rather surprising result collides with the feeling of physicists who take measurement as a myth. In the closing this paper shows how the measurement relativity wholly consists with some effects calculated in QM and in Einstein’s theory.
Abstract. No consensus seems to exist as to what constitutes a measurement which is still considered somewhat mysterious in many respects in quantum mechanics. At successive stages mathematical theory of measure, metrology and measurement theory tried to systematize this field but significant questions remain open about the nature of measurement, about the characterization of the observer, about the reliability of measurement processes etc. The present paper attempts to talk about these questions through the information science. We start from the idea, rather common and intuitive, that the measurement process basically acquires information. Next we expand this idea through four formal definitions and infer some corollaries regarding the measurement process from those definitions. Relativity emerges as the basic property of measurement from the present logical framework and this rather surprising result collides with the feeling of physicists who take measurement as a myth. In the closing this paper shows how the measurement relativity wholly consists with some effects calculated in QM and in Einstein’s theory.
No consensus seems to exist as to what constitutes a measurement which is still considered somewhat mysterious in many respects in quantum mechanics. At successive stages mathematical theory of measure, metrology and measurement theory tried to systematize this field but significant questions remain open about the nature of measurement, about the characterization of the observer, about the reliability of measurement processes etc. The present paper attempts to talk about these questions through the information science. We start from the idea, rather common and intuitive, that the measurement process basically acquires information. Next we expand this idea through four formal definitions and infer some corollaries regarding the measurement process from those definitions. Relativity emerges as the basic property of measurement from the present logical framework and this rather surprising result collides with the feeling of physicists who take measurement as a myth. In the closing this paper shows how the measurement relativity wholly consists with some effects calculated in QM and in Einstein's theory.
This paper introduces a short survey on recent information theories and reviews some critical notes expressed on quantum information. The severe difficulties emerging from the literature lead us to argue about the way to follow, and in a preliminary stage, we consider how to proceed in order to provide a reasonable contribution to the conceptualization of information in classical and quantum physics. We conclude that we should go toward the essential elements of the system that acquire information and should define the common components of the measurement processes. In this way we should be able to establish fundamental properties and to circumvent tricky difficulties arisen by the concept of the observer and the variety of interferences that disturb the acquisition of information. Universal experience shows how sharpness is the indispensable feature of detected signals and we calculate the discernability of observables using various mathematical formalisms. The present logical frame brings evidence on how information is not an absolute quantity, and we close with a few notes on the information relativism which modern literature tackles from the operational stance and the philosophical stance.
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 represents one of the greatest triumphs of the scientific enterprise of the twentieth century. The stunning success of quantum theory has led to many revolutionary inventions and its extraordinary concepts describe the heart of several important real world applications like transistors and lasers. The theory makes accurate predictions about a wide range of physical phenomena and has historically withstood the tests and scrutiny of every experimental investigation. However, inspite of the fact that quantum theory is widely regarded by the scientific establishment as the fundamental theory of nature and is immensly successful and useful, its conceptual framework makes many predictions which are difficult to comprehend “classically. The theory is, pardoxically, powerful and confusing at the same time. Quantum theory’s unusual predictions originate from its basic formailsm which involves concepts like probability amplitudes and the linear superposition principle(Dirac, 1947). The quantum view appears abstract and counterintuitive and at odds with classical perceptions. Many of the conceptual problems of quantum mechanics are encompassed in what is known as the quantum measurement problem(Peres, 1986; von Neumann, 1932; Wheeler & Zurek, 1983). Conventionally, the measurement paradox is supposedly ’resolved’ by forcing a notion of a sudden collapse of the state vector of the system being measured. However, the nature of this mechanism is at odds with the basic tenets of quantum mechanics and hence may lie outside its realm thus questioning the validity of the theory it self. Closely related with the problem of measurement in quantum mechanics is the question of its connection with the emergence of classicality and the elusive boundary between quantum and classical worlds. What is the connection between the ‘classical’ and the ‘quantum’ worlds? Is there a definite relationship? Are classical mechanics and quantum mechanics two mutually exclusive incompatible theories or are they two aspects of the same underlying philosophy? Classical objects are eventually composed of elements of the microworld which can be described quantum mechanically. So, how and where can there be a boundary between the two worlds? In the following section we begin by introducing the quantum measurement problem. In the next section we will discuss attempts to understand and explain away the underlying paradoxes in quantum theory as highlighted in the quantum measurement problem and the question of the quantum-classical connection. From among the various explanations that seek a resolution to the conceptual problems of quantum mechanics, we focus on the ‘environment induced decoherence theory’ an approach that employs the methods developed by several authors to analyse the quantum mechanics of Measurement in Quantum Mechanics: Decoherence and the Pointer Basis
This project is a theoretical study that aims to explain the seemingly counterintuitive results of quantum mechanics within a more understandable, causal, and conceptually unified framework. KZSK seeks to transform the approach sometimes summarized as “do not question, just calculate” into an approach of “question, uncover the mechanism, and make sense of it.” Rather than leaving quantum phenomena as disconnected mysteries, it attempts to bring them together under a common formative logic and a coherent physical process of emergence. In this way, KZSK aims to reduce as much as possible the idea that “quantum mechanics works, but we do not fully understand why it works this way.” From this perspective, KZSK is intended not merely as an interpretation of quantum mechanics, but as a formation architecture that seeks to explain why quantum behavior emerges. This architecture is based on three fundamental stages: 1. Timeless Root Reality: The formative foundation and relational order that precede physical spacetime. 2. Quantum Intermediate Form: The transition level between the timeless structure and temporal physical processes, where phase, sequentiality, and micro-temporal change begin to emerge. 3. Physical Spacetime: The classical level in which local interactions, measurement, and physical records become manifest. Within this structure, waves, particles, measurement, and entanglement are not treated as independent quantum mysteries, but as different stages and manifestations of the same underlying process of formation. KZSK also investigates the hypothesis that a more fundamental deterministic process may underlie the apparent probabilistic behavior of quantum mechanics. The aim is to develop this framework beyond a purely philosophical interpretation into a physical model candidate that can be mathematically formulated, further developed, and experimentally tested. KZSK is not yet a verified physical theory. Its physical validity must be evaluated through further mathematical development, quantitative comparison with existing experiments, independent research, and experimental testing.
Measurements play a specific role in quantum mechanics; only measurements allow us to catch a glimpse of the eluding physical reality. However, there is something deeply unsatisfactory with this specificity—a measurement is itself a physical process! Several varying modes of coping with this dilemma have been proposed and this article tries to describe how a now-century-long discussion has led to new insights about the transition from the quantum to the classical world. Starting from the pioneer’s view of the quantum measurement problem, it follows the development of formalisms, the interest from philosophers for its new aspects on reality and how different interpretations of quantum mechanics have tried to support our classically working brains in understanding quantum phenomena. Decoherence is a main topic and its role in measurement processes exemplified. The question of whether the quantum measurement problem is now solved is left open for the readers’ own judgment.