The famous 1927 Solvay Conference was a turning point in Physics. Scientific realists, like Albert Einstein, had lost a fundamental conflict and instrumentalists, like Niels Bohr, had won. Since then, Physics has followed the path of instrumentalists in which the quantum physics has been determined by the concept of elementary particles and probability waves. Until May 2013, when for the first time a photo had been made of the probability waves inside the hydrogen atom, it was impossible to make a photo of a non-existing complex probability wave with mass zero, but the fact could not be denied anymore and scientists had succeeded to make the “complex” and “non-existing” quantum mechanical “probability wave” visible. New discoveries, like “photonic molecules” and “photon-photon interaction”, require a new interpretation of the Copenhagen Interpretation. Since the Copenhagen Interpretation, there is still no clarity about the physical interpretation of the quantum mechanical “probability wave function”.
The famous 1927 Solvay Conference was a turning point in Physics. Scientific realists, like Albert Einstein, had lost a fundamental conflict and instrumentalists, like Niels Bohr, had won. Since then, Physics has followed the path of instrumentalists in which the quantum physics has been determined by the concept of elementary particles and probability waves. Until May 2013, when for the first time a photo had been made of the probability waves inside the hydrogen atom, it was impossible to make a photo of a non-existing complex probability wave with mass zero, but the fact could not be denied anymore and scientists had succeeded to make the “complex” and “non-existing” quantum mechanical “probability wave” visible. New discoveries, like “photonic molecules” and “photon-photon interaction”, require a new interpretation of the Copenhagen Interpretation. Since the Copenhagen Interpretation, there is still no clarity about the physical interpretation of the quantum mechanical “probability wave function”.
The founding fathers of quantum mechanics had already perceived the essence of the difficulties of quantum mechanics; today, after almost a century, the discussions are still lively and, if some very interesting new aspects have emerged, at a deeper level the questions have not changed so much. What is more recent, nevertheless, is a general change of attitude among physicists: until about 1970 or 1980, most physicists thought that the essential questions had been settled, and that “Bohr was right and proved his opponents to be wrong”. This was probably a consequence of the famous discussions between Bohr, Einstein, Schrödinger, Heisenberg, Pauli, de Broglie, and others (in particular at the Solvay meetings [1–3], where Bohr's point of view had successfully resisted Einstein's extremely clever attacks). The majority of physicists did not know the details of the arguments. They nevertheless thought that the standard “Copenhagen interpretation” had clearly emerged from the infancy of quantum mechanics as the only sensible attitude for good scientists. This interpretation includes the idea that modern physics must contain indeterminacy as an essential ingredient: it is fundamentally impossible to predict the outcome of single microscopical events; it is impossible to go beyond the formalism of the wave function (or its generalization, the state vector ∣ψ) and complete it.
Have you ever tried to define light? If so, your definition is probably related to vision, the ability to see things. The Merriam-Webster English dictionary defines light as “something that makes vision possible”. However, the definition of the “nature of light” is a complex term already discussed by philosophers of Ancient Greece. In the 17th century, the debate on the matter focused on whether light was a particle or a wave, based on the different properties of light that had been gradually discovered over time. Isaac Newton (1642−1727) was a defender of the corpuscular theory of light, which considered light to be formed by particles, i.e., small pieces of matter, like dust or grains of sand. He was the author of Opticks (1706), the front cover of which appears in Fig. 1.1. Christian Huygens (1629–1695), on the other hand, supported the theory that light is a wave. These are two completely different definitions of the same physical concept. A range of experiments were developed to attempt to clarify this dilemma, but it was only until 1900 when Max Planck (1858-1947) introduced the basis of a theory that would go on to revolutionize scientific thinking, marking the beginning of modern physics: quantum theory. Developed during the 20th century thanks to advances made by scientists such as Niels Bohr, Born, Heisenberg, Schrödinger, Pauli, Dirac, Einstein or de Broglie, quantum theory clarified that light is neither a particle nor a wave, but that it has a dual nature: it behaves like a wave as it spreads but like a particle in its interactions with matter. In this book, we will specify where necessary whether light behaves as a particle or as a wave, although in most cases we refer to rays of light, which always represent the direction of propagation of light.
For over nine decades, quantum mechanics has profoundly shaped our understanding of nature, offering explanations for the stability of atoms, the formation of mole cules, the properties of materials, and phenomena such as light or radioactivity. It is essential to modern technologies—from microchips to lasers—and underpins the physics of elementary particles. Yet, despite its successes, it remains a deeply mysterious theory, confronting a central enigma: why does the quantum world behave so differently from everyday reality? Elements such as superposition and quantum entanglement—which allow particles to exist simultaneously in multiple states or remain interconnected regardless of distance—contradict classical world intuitions. This gap between microscopic and macroscopic behavior has given rise to what is known as the “measurement problem,” raising fundamental questions about the nature of reality. Diverging interpretations have led to two major schools of thought: anti-realism, promoted by Niels Bohr, which holds that reality depends on the observer and their interaction with measurement instruments; and realism, supported by Albert Einstein, which argues that quantum mechanics is incomplete and that eality exists independently of observation. Bohr’s complementary philosophy and Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle were central to the formulation of the “Copenhagen interpretation,” which became dominant in the 20th century. However, the persistent opposition of scientists like Einstein and Schrödinger inspired generations of physicists to seek a unification between quantum mechanics and relativity, culminating in new theories such as loop quantum gravity and string theory. Thus, the debate between realism and anti-realism remains alive, and philosophy continues to play a crucial role in exploring the new foundations of physics.
We like to take stock of the matter now, after we have presented different aspects of quantum-like reality proposal. We started by observing that the objective realist picture of the world as proposed by Newtonian-Hamiltonian framework, and much endorsed by scientists and philosophers from different domains of knowledge, could not stand the test of time. Particularly since the 1920s, it got clarified that the same picture of reality would be an obvious failure in the microphysical realm, the quantum-physical realm. Since the 1920s, the world witnessed the rise of the Copenhagen framework, with various interpretations over time. Most of these interpretations (whether ontological, non-ontological or epistemological) were in contrast to the classical physics ontology (either waves or particles with definite trajectories). Such varied interpretations have largely generated two ideological camps, realist and anti-realist. The realist camp (including diverse frameworks like Bohmian pilot wave theory, Everettian multiverse theory, to David Albert-led wave function realism [ Albert, 2023 ]) attempted to provide a new ontology of the world, whereas the non-realist camp (particularly the original Copenhagen camp) wanted to challenge the very attempt of whether at all an objective picture of microphysical reality is even possible to imagine.
The famous 1927 Solvay Conference was considered a turning point in the world of Physics. The scientific realists like Albert Einstein had lost and the instrumentalists like Niels Bohr had won the fundamental conflict. Since then Physics has followed the path of the instrumentalists in which Quantum Physics has been determined by the concept of Elementary Particles and Probability Waves. Until May 2013, when for the first time a photo had been made of the Probability Waves Inside the Hydrogen Atom . It should be impossible to make a photo of a non-existing complex probability wave with mass zero But the fact could not be denied anymore that scientists had succeeded to make the “complex” and the “non-existing” quantum mechanical “Probability Wave” visible. New discoveries like “Photonic Molecules” and “Photon-Photon Interaction” require a new interpretation of the Copenhagen Interpretation . Since the Copenhagen Interpretation there is still no clarity about the physical interpretation of the Quantum Mechanical “Probability Wave Function”This Manuscript describes a third unknown interpretation of the Quantum Mechanical “Probability Wave Function”. A fundamental physical interpretation that will change the generally accepted Copenhagen Interpretation. This Manuscript will answer the fundamental question: Does an alternative theory exist in which the existence of this particular photo, of the Quantum Mechanical Probability Wave within the Hydrogen Atom, could be explained. And that the famous photo of the Hydrogen Atom can be explained in a logical and a simple way. To find the answer, we have to go back in time. Back 300 years in time to the moment when Isaac Newton discovered the beauty and one of the many secrets of the light. The moment when science walked away from light. And we return to the fundamental question: “Is it possible to build Matter out of Light (confined electromagnetic waves)?” To answer this question if it is possible to build Matter out of Light, we first have to answer the question how we have come to this world of Probability Waves and Elementary Particles and Quantum Physics.
The famous 1927 Solvay Conference was considered a turning point in the world of Physics. The scientific realists like Albert Einstein had lost and the instrumentalists like Niels Bohr had won the fundamental conflict. Since then Physics has followed the path of the instrumentalists in which Quantum Physics has been determined by the concept of Elementary Particles and Probability Waves. Until May 2013, when for the first time a photo had been made of the Probability Waves Inside the Hydrogen Atom . It should be impossible to make a photo of a non-existing complex probability wave with mass zero But the fact could not be denied anymore that scientists had succeeded to make the “complex” and the “non-existing” quantum mechanical “Probability Wave” visible. New discoveries like “Photonic Molecules” and “Photon-Photon Interaction” require a new interpretation of the Copenhagen Interpretation . Since the Copenhagen Interpretation there is still no clarity about the physical interpretation of the Quantum Mechanical “Probability Wave Function”This Manuscript describes a third unknown interpretation of the Quantum Mechanical “Probability Wave Function”. A fundamental physical interpretation that will change the generally accepted Copenhagen Interpretation. This Manuscript will answer the fundamental question: Does an alternative theory exist in which the existence of this particular photo, of the Quantum Mechanical Probability Wave within the Hydrogen Atom, could be explained. And that the famous photo of the Hydrogen Atom can be explained in a logical and a simple way. To find the answer, we have to go back in time. Back 300 years in time to the moment when Isaac Newton discovered the beauty and one of the many secrets of the light. The moment when science walked away from light. And we return to the fundamental question: “Is it possible to build Matter out of Light (confined electromagnetic waves)?” To answer this question if it is possible to build Matter out of Light, we first have to answer the question how we have come to this world of Probability Waves and Elementary Particles and Quantum Physics.Louis de Broglie described in 1924 in his PhD thesis the wave properties of matter. Erwin Schrödinger published in 1926 the well-known Schrödinger wave equation with the characteristic spherical and elliptical wave solutions. To describe these material waves, the immediately and first explanation was: “There is only one possibility. These are “Electromagnetic Waves”. De Broglie Waves are ” Light Waves”. Because these were the only waves, known in the world of Physics, that could travel through vacuum. But there was a fundamental problem. These material waves, discovered by Louis de Broglie and mathematically described by Erwin Schrödinger could never be solutions of the well-known 4 linear equations of James Clerk Maxwell. The material waves were spherical and elliptical solutions of confinement and that was impossible for the solutions of the linear Maxwell Equations. According to the linear Maxwell Equations, superposition is possible but Electromagnetic Interaction and Electromagnetic Confinement can only be described by a set of non-linear differential equations. To solve this fundamental problem a new set of 3 non-linear Electromagnetic Equations (Equation 5 in this manuscript) has been developed which replaces the well-known 4 linear Maxwell Equations and the possible solutions of Equation (5) are also Spherical and Elliptical solutions of confinement. Table 1 in this manuscript presents a number of Electromagnetic Spherical Confinements as solutions of Equation 5a .A second problem was that the model of the atom of Bohr could not hold. How could an electron be everywhere at the same time in a kind of a spherical shell surrounding the nucleus. And be a particle at the same time. And Bohr found a compromise to declare the “De Broglie” waves to be the probability waves. Two problems were solved. Bohr’s planetary model could hold. And there was a name for the unknown material waves, discovered by Louis de Broglie and mathematically described by Erwin Schrödinger. The theory of “Probability Waves, Elementary Particles and Quantum Physics” had been created.