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

A Chemical-Physical View of the Interpretation of Wavefunction

Kourosh Honarmand Ebrahimi

Published Sep 10, 2020• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Here, based on different experimental setups and thought experiments it is shown that some of the predictions of the nonlocal probabilistic interpretation of wavefunction are not observed and that this interpretation does not account for the real-world physical and chemical interactions. Considering these interactions, classical and quantum mechanics are unified and a testable, local, and probabilistic interpretation of wavefunction is proposed in explaining the outcome of a double-slit experiment. This analysis suggests that there is no spooky action at a distance.

DOI
10.26434/chemrxiv.12931406.v1

Related papers

A Chemical-Physical View of the Interpretation of Wavefunction

Kourosh Honarmand Ebrahimi

Here, based on different experimental setups and thought experiments it is shown that some of the predictions of the nonlocal probabilistic interpretation of wavefunction are not observed and that this interpretation does not account for the real-world physical and chemical interactions. Considering these interactions, classical and quantum mechanics are unified and a testable, local, and probabilistic interpretation of wavefunction is proposed in explaining the outcome of a double-slit experiment. This analysis suggests that there is no spooky action at a distance.

•Sep 11, 2020•0 citations

Expectation-Realization Interpretation of Quantum Superposition

Yanting Wang

By comparing Schrödinger's cat with its classical counterpart, I show that a quantum superposition should be understood as an expectation over possible eigenstates weighted by wave-like probabilities. Upon the occurrence of a certain event, the quantum system is randomly realized into one of the possible eigenstates due to its intrinsic stochasticity. While the randomness of a single realization cannot be controlled or predicted, the overall distribution can be regulated via experimental setup and converges as the number of events increases. A measurement is indeed an activity employing a certain event to convert a quantum effect into a macroscopic outcome. Consequently, the puzzling concepts of wavefunction collapse, many worlds, and decoherence become unnecessary for understanding quantum superposition. This expectation-realization interpretation, which integrates probability theory with wave mechanics, can also be extended to quantum pathways. Moreover, it reframes tests of Bell's inequalities as validating the wave-like probability nature of quantum mechanics, with no need to invoke the mysterious notions of quantum non-locality and "spooky action at a distance".

quant-pharXiv:2511.04154•Nov 7, 2025•0 citations

A Time-Symmetric and Retrocausal Resolution of the EPR Paradox

Michael B. Heaney

The Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics explains the Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) experiments with "spooky action at a distance" and nonlocal wavefunction collapse. A time-symmetric and retrocausal interpretation of quantum mechanics explains the same experiments without spooky action at a distance or nonlocal wavefunction collapse. An experiment that can distinguish between the Copenhagen and Time-Symmetric Interpretations is described.

Entropy•Mar 12, 2026•0 citations

Emergent Dot-Like Double-Slit Interference, Stern-Gerlach Bi-Fringe and Quantum-Entanglement Signals: A Quantized EM-Field Paradigm without Schrödinger Equation, Wavefunction Collapse and Spooky Action

Jau Tang

We present a new paradigm of quantum reality in which classical particles interact deterministically with quantized electromagnetic fields embedded in a causal lattice spacetime. These interactions induce discrete momentum transfers that account for the dot-like buildup of double-slit interference fringes, the bi-fringe outcomes of the Stern–Gerlach experiment, and the correlations observed in entanglement tests. Within this framework, which provides a non-local hidden variable mechanism, naturally leads to the emergence of Heisenberg uncertainty, de Broglie duality, and the Dirac equation as natural consequences of causal field dynamics, rather than as postulated axioms. The model further provides experimentally testable predictions—including momentum-transfer sidebands and the temperature dependence of the Casimir force—that distinguish it from both the Copenhagen interpretation and more recent alternatives. By grounding quantum phenomena in causal field–particle interactions, this paradigm reproduces the experimental dot-like features in double-slit interference and Stern-Gerlach fringes. Thus, it offers a transparent and physically consistent alternative to the Copenhagen interpretation, achieving the completeness that Einstein argued was missing from conventional theory.

•Oct 11, 2025•0 citations

What Is a Wave Function?

William J. Mullin

The wave function gives probabilities, but is it a real physical quantity, as in the ontic interpretation of quantum mechanics, or just a measure of human belief about a physical system, as in an epistemic interpretation? These questions are introduced by treating Schrödinger’s cat and Wigner’s friend. An important question is whether quantum mechanics applies to macroscopic objects, for example, cats. SQUID experiments have been performed that see quantum interference in very large objects, whereas with most macroscopic objects quantum interference disappears because of decoherence. Various views of the meaning of quantum mechanics are discussed: the Copenhagen interpretation, continuous spontaneous localization, Everett’s many-worlds interpretation, Bohm’s hidden-variable model, and quantum Bayesianism. The latter holds that the wave function represents one’s best belief about the state of a quantum system, rather than an actual physical property. This leads to discussions of recent theories and experiments explicitly designed to test wave function reality.

Oxford University Press eBooks•Mar 16, 2017•0 citations

Does the wavefunction describe individual systems?

Antonio Di Lorenzo

We analyze the issue of the interpretation of the wavefunction, namely whether it should be interpreted as describing individual systems or ensembles of identically prepared systems. We propose an experiment which can decide the issue, based on the simultaneous measurement of the same observable with different detectors, and we discuss the theoretical implications of the possible experimental outcomes.

arXiv:quant-ph/0603001•Feb 28, 2006•0 citations
Here, based on different experimental setups and thought experiments it is shown that some of the predictions of the nonlocal probabilistic interpretation of wavefunction are not observed and that this interpretation does not account for the real-world physical and chemical interactions. Considering these interactions, classical and quantum mechanics are unified and a testable, local, and probabilistic interpretation of wavefunction is proposed in explaining the outcome of a double-slit experiment. This analysis suggests that there is no spooky action at a distance.
Here, based on different experimental setups and thought experiments it is shown that some of the predictions of the nonlocal probabilistic interpretation of wavefunction are not observed and that this interpretation does not account for the real-world physical and chemical interactions. Considering these interactions, classical and quantum mechanics are unified and a testable, local, and probabilistic interpretation of wavefunction is proposed in explaining the outcome of a double-slit experiment. This analysis suggests that there is no spooky action at a distance.
By comparing Schrödinger's cat with its classical counterpart, I show that a quantum superposition should be understood as an expectation over possible eigenstates weighted by wave-like probabilities. Upon the occurrence of a certain event, the quantum system is randomly realized into one of the possible eigenstates due to its intrinsic stochasticity. While the randomness of a single realization cannot be controlled or predicted, the overall distribution can be regulated via experimental setup and converges as the number of events increases. A measurement is indeed an activity employing a certain event to convert a quantum effect into a macroscopic outcome. Consequently, the puzzling concepts of wavefunction collapse, many worlds, and decoherence become unnecessary for understanding quantum superposition. This expectation-realization interpretation, which integrates probability theory with wave mechanics, can also be extended to quantum pathways. Moreover, it reframes tests of Bell's inequalities as validating the wave-like probability nature of quantum mechanics, with no need to invoke the mysterious notions of quantum non-locality and "spooky action at a distance".
We present a new paradigm of quantum reality in which classical particles interact deterministically with quantized electromagnetic fields embedded in a causal lattice spacetime. These interactions induce discrete momentum transfers that account for the dot-like buildup of double-slit interference fringes, the bi-fringe outcomes of the Stern–Gerlach experiment, and the correlations observed in entanglement tests. Within this framework, which provides a non-local hidden variable mechanism, naturally leads to the emergence of Heisenberg uncertainty, de Broglie duality, and the Dirac equation as natural consequences of causal field dynamics, rather than as postulated axioms. The model further provides experimentally testable predictions—including momentum-transfer sidebands and the temperature dependence of the Casimir force—that distinguish it from both the Copenhagen interpretation and more recent alternatives. By grounding quantum phenomena in causal field–particle interactions, this paradigm reproduces the experimental dot-like features in double-slit interference and Stern-Gerlach fringes. Thus, it offers a transparent and physically consistent alternative to the Copenhagen interpretation, achieving the completeness that Einstein argued was missing from conventional theory.
The wave function gives probabilities, but is it a real physical quantity, as in the ontic interpretation of quantum mechanics, or just a measure of human belief about a physical system, as in an epistemic interpretation? These questions are introduced by treating Schrödinger’s cat and Wigner’s friend. An important question is whether quantum mechanics applies to macroscopic objects, for example, cats. SQUID experiments have been performed that see quantum interference in very large objects, whereas with most macroscopic objects quantum interference disappears because of decoherence. Various views of the meaning of quantum mechanics are discussed: the Copenhagen interpretation, continuous spontaneous localization, Everett’s many-worlds interpretation, Bohm’s hidden-variable model, and quantum Bayesianism. The latter holds that the wave function represents one’s best belief about the state of a quantum system, rather than an actual physical property. This leads to discussions of recent theories and experiments explicitly designed to test wave function reality.