Accepting a time-symmetric quantum dynamical world with ontological wave functions or fields, we follow arguments that naturally lead to a two-boundary interpretation of quantum mechanics. The usual two boundary picture is a valid superdeterministic interpretation. It has, however, one unsatisfactory feature. The random selection of a chosen measurement path of the universe is far too complicated. To avoid it, we propose an alternate two-boundary concept called surjective mapping conjecture. It takes as fundamental a quantum-time running forward like the usual time on the wave-function side and backward on the complex conjugate side. Unrelated fixed arbitrary boundary conditions at the initial and the final quantum times then determine the measurement path of the expanding and contracting quantum-time universe in the required way.
Accepting a time-symmetric quantum dynamical world with ontological wave functions or fields, we follow arguments that naturally lead to a two-boundary interpretation of quantum mechanics. The usual two boundary picture is a valid superdeterministic interpretation. It has, however, one unsatisfactory feature. The random selection of a chosen measurement path of the universe is far too complicated. To avoid it, we propose an alternate two-boundary concept called surjective mapping conjecture. It takes as fundamental a quantum-time running forward like the usual time on the wave-function side and backward on the complex conjugate side. Unrelated fixed arbitrary boundary conditions at the initial and the final quantum times then determine the measurement path of the expanding and contracting quantum-time universe in the required way.
We suggest solving the measurement problem by postulating the existence of a special future final boundary condition for the universe. Although this is an extension of the way boundary conditions are usually chosen (in terrestrial laboratories), it is our only deviation from standard quantum mechanics. Using two state vectors, or the "two-state", to describe completely the state of systems of interest, we analyze ideal and "weak" measurements, and show the consistency of our scheme. If the final state of a measuring device is assigned to be one of the possible outcomes of the measurement, an effective reduction is observed after an ideal measurement process. For final conditions chosen with an appropriate distribution, the predictions of standard quantum mechanics may be reconstructed, thus eliminating probability from the description of any single measurement. The interpretation attained, the Teleological Interpretation, is an ontological one; it is local and deterministic. Other special assumptions in the choice of the final boundary condition may explain certain unaccounted for phenomena, or even supply a mechanism for essential free will. In this context we believe that a new conception of time should be adopted.
We suggest an interpretation of quantum mechanics, inspired by the ideas of Aharonov et al. of a time-symmetric description of quantum theory. We show that a special final boundary condition for the Universe, may be consistently defined as to determine single classical-like measurement outcomes, thus solving the "measurement problem". No other deviation is made from standard quantum mechanics, and the resulting theory is deterministic (in a two-time sense) and local. Quantum mechanical probabilities are recovered in general, but are eliminated from the description of any single measurement. We call this the Two-time interpretation of quantum mechanics. We analyze ideal measurements, showing how the quantum superposition is, in effect, dynamically reduced to a single classical state via a "two-time decoherence" process. We discuss some philosophical aspects of the suggested interpretation. We also discuss weak measurements using the two-time formalism, and remark that in these measurement situations, special final boundary conditions for the Universe, might explain some unaccounted for phenomena.
The measurement problem of quantum mechanics is predominantly treated in contemporary foundations research as an unresolved problem of dynamics or ontology. Accordingly, dominant solution approaches aim either at additional collapse mechanisms (e.g., GRW-type models), at ontological branching (Many-Worlds interpretations), or at an information-theoretic reinterpretation of state and measurement.The present contribution advances a different thesis. It shows that, despite their methodological differences, these approaches share a common categorical presupposition: they treat the transition from possibility to facticity as an intra-worldly describable occurrence—whether as a dynamical process, an ontological splitting, or a state update. It is precisely this presupposition that is called into question here.Starting from an ontological distinction between possibility and facticity, it is argued that measurement cannot be understood as a temporal event within an already structured world. Rather, it marks a boundary at which temporal, processual, and informational descriptions lose their applicability. The transition to objectivity is therefore not an explainable event, but an irreversible restriction of the space of possibility, through which world becomes factically binding in the first place.Against this background, dynamical collapse models, Many-Worlds interpretations, and information-theoretic ontologies are comparatively analyzed. The aim is not a refutation of these approaches, but a precise boundary determination: it is shown in what way they each provide formally successful answers to partial aspects of the measurement problem, while at the same time presupposing the categorical status of facticization that they claim to explain.The contribution does not understand itself as an alternative interpretation of quantum mechanics, but as an ontological clarification of its domain of validity. It proposes that the measurement problem should no longer be treated as the search for a hidden mechanism, but as an indication of a structural boundary of physical description itself.
The measurement problem in quantum mechanics has been a cause of much puzzlement over the years. The very idea of having two different versions of reality for the same system has been a cause for much debate. Often quantum mechanics textbooks follow the ‘shut up and calculate’ paradigm. This denies the opportunity for the common student to understand the consequence of one of the most elegant and beautiful aspects of science. The state of the art textbooks give a purely algebraic, perfunctory and monotonous approach where the real consequence of the system is not fully appreciated. A good reason for this is the considerable deviation of the quantum mechanical process from the commonsensical idea of truth, reality and reason. We tend to look at the world in a materialistic, deterministic, causal and objectivistic way. We tend not to accept a world of contradictions. A quantum measurement is essentially an amalgamation of contradictions, mystery and duality. It encompasses an implicit dependence on subjectivity and contradicts with causality as we know it. We look at the world as in the present. But a quantum mechanical measurement is a prediction of the future influenced by the observer or the measurer. This offers a philosophical and pedagogical conundrum. It poses a challenge on not just how our perception of the world might change in addition to providing a big challenge on how to make it compatible with the other successful theories of physics. The most common text book interpretation of quantum mechanics has been the Copenhagen Interpretation suggests the ‘collapse of the wave function’ as a mechanism of transition between duality. But a more bizarre yet elegant theory, extending quantum formalism to the classical domain, called the Many Worlds Interpretation has been catching up very quickly; it stands for the split of the universe when we make a quantum mechanical measurement. Consequently, reality as we is redefined as a universal wave function which is a superposition of several outcomes, which is incompatible with many of the successful concepts of physics and has several problems like the correct idea about probability or basis. We adapt the idea of the universal wave function, but instead suggest a continuum interpretation of quantum mechanics where the universal wave function represents the entire singular universe and the concept of atoms or electrons as conceptually a continuous part of it rather than a distinct separate entity. Such an interpretation could be compatible with other continuum theories like the Superfluid vacuum theory or the Higgs Field.
In the well known Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum mechanics, advocated by N. Bohr, the physical objects and the experimental results can be described only in a macroscopic language, leaving any possible microscopic description as unspeakable. This point of view has been deepened by C. Rovelli in the relational interpretation of Quantum mechanics. Most of the alternative interpretations, which try a detailed microscopic description of physical phenomena and of their evolution, have in common the explicit introduction of the wave function as the basic element of the theory. These interpretations require the notion of quantum state as the fundamental concept of the theory, which is the typical unspeakable physical element according to the Copenhagen interpretation. The two basic physical entities are intimately bound together by the integrity of the wave function. These interpretations are usually indicated as realistic. It is well known that the use of the wave function and its time evolution in the description of the physical processes leads unavoidably to some difficulties or so-called paradoxes. The measurement problem is at the center of these difficulties, mainly because it requires the introduction of the reduction process of the wave function, which is not included explicitly within the mathematical formalism of Quantum Mechanics. In this paper we build up and propose a model which goes beyond the standard formalism and which is able to solve the measurement problem and all the other difficulties which, in a way or in another, are related to it.
What is quantum mechanics about? The most natural way to interpret quantum mechanics realistically as a theory about the world might seem to be what is called wave function ontology: the view according to which the wave function mathematically represents in a complete way fundamentally all there is in the world. We argue that: • Strictly speaking, it is not possible to interpret quantum theories as theories about the wave function; • Even if the wave function is supplemented by additional non-ontological structures, there are reasons not to take the resulting theory seriously; • All quantum theories should be regarded as theories in which physical objects are constituted by a primitive ontology. The primitive ontology is mathematically represented in the theory by a mathematical entity in three-dimensional space, or space-time.