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 Reports

The Everything-Is-a-Quantum-Wave Interpretation of Quantum Physics

Vlatko Vedral

Published Jun 6, 2023• 5 citations
Publisher

Abstract

In this paper, I would like to outline what I think is the most natural interpretation of quantum mechanics. By natural, I simply mean that it requires the least amount of excess baggage and that it is universal in the sense that it can be consistently applied to all the observed phenomena, including the universe as a whole. I call it the “Everything is a Quantum Wave” Interpretation (EQWI) because I think this is a more appropriate name than the Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI). The paper explains why this is so.

DOI
10.3390/quantum5020031

Related papers

The Everything-is-a-Quantum-Wave Interpretation of Quantum Physics

Vlatko Vedral

I outline what I think is the most natural interpretation of quantum mechanics. By natural, I simply mean that it requires the least amount of excess baggage and that it is universal in the sense that it can be consistently applied to all the observed phenomena including the universe as a whole. I call it the Everything-is-a-Quantum-Wave Interpretation because I think this is a more appropriate name than the Many Worlds Interpretation. Here, I explain why this is so. Quanta 2026; 15: 19–23.

arXiv:2303.00831•Quanta•Oct 4, 2026•0 citations

Are there really many worlds in the "Many-worlds interpretation" of Quantum Mechanics?

Daniel Parrochia

Since the 1970s, the Everett-Wheeler many-worlds interpretation (MWI) of Quantum Mechanics (1955) has been much in the news. One wonders about the worlds in question, their branches, their splittings, their number. It is most often ignored that this language is not that of Everett, whom Wheeler very quickly stopped supporting. Moreover, for some interpreters, the real meaning of Everett ideas is not the coexistence of many worlds, but the existence of a single quantum one. In this context, what should we think of attempts to verify Everett thesis? What about the connexion between MWI and the cosmological multiverse? How to understand the links between the quantum world and the classical one? This article tries to answer some of these questions.

arXiv:2001.03771•Jan 11, 2020•0 citations

Why the Many-Worlds Interpretation?

Lev Vaidman A

A brief (subjective) description of the state of the art of the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics (MWI) is presented. It is argued that the MWI is the only interpretation which removes action at a distance and randomness from quantum theory. Limitations of the MWI regarding questions of probability which can be legitimately asked are specified. The ontological picture of the MWI as a theory of the universal wave function decomposed into a superposition of world wave functions, the important parts of which are defined in three-dimensional space, is presented from the point of view of our particular branch. Some speculations about misconceptions, which apparently prevent the MWI from being in the consensus, are mentioned.

arXiv:2208.04618•Quantum Reports•Aug 4, 2022•22 citations

Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. A view of our universe

Ingvar Lindgren, J. Weiland

The interpretation of quantum mechanics has been disputed ever since the advent of the theory in the 1920’s. Famous are the discussions over long time between Einstein and Bohr. Einstein refused to accept the so‐called Copenhagen interpretation, where the wave function collapses at a measurement and where the outcome of the measurement is essentially accidental (“God does not play dice”). Alternative interpretations have appeared, but the Copenhagen school has dominated the thoughts throughout the decades. One interesting interpretation was formulated in 1957 by Hugh Everett at Princeton, a student of John Wheeler, which abandons the wave‐function collapse. In this model the universe is governed entirely by the Schrödinger equation, which does not allow for any collapse. In Everett’s model after a measurement the wave function is separated into different branches that do not interact. This model was left unnoticed for long time until Bryce DeWitt took it up in 1970 and termed it “Many‐Worlds Interpretation”, a term that in some sense is misleading. Everett’s model is incomplete, and it was later supplemented by the theory of decoherence, which explains how the different branches decouple as a result of the interaction with the environment. This extended model has in recent years gained increased respect, and some believe that it is the only model made available so far that is fully consistent with quantum mechanics. This interpretation can also shed some light on the development of the universe and, in particular, on the so‐called Anthropic principle, which puts human beings at the center of the development.

AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2009•0 citations

Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics: A Paradoxical Picture

Amir Abbass Varshovi

The many-worlds interpretation (MWI) of quantum mechanics is studied from an unprecedented ontological perspective based on the reality of (semi-) deterministic parallel worlds in the interpretation. It is demonstrated that with thanks to the uncertainty principle there would be no consistent way to specify the correct ontology of the Universe, hence the MWI is subject to an inherent contradiction which claims that the world where we live in is unreal.

arXiv:2011.13928•Nov 27, 2020•0 citations

Interpretation of quantum theory - An overview

Dimitris Lazarou

Quantum Mechanics, almost 80 years after its arrival, is a well established and experimentally not falsified theory. It has predicted and explained a whole series of natural phenomena of a very delicate nature. But its interpretation has not gained universal acceptance. Many scientists have considered the conceptual framework of quantum theory to be unsatisfactory. The very foundations of Quantum Mechanics is a matter that needs to be resolved in order to achieve and gain a deep physical understanding of the underlying physical procedures that constitute our world.

arXiv:0712.3466•Dec 20, 2007•5 citations
In this paper, I would like to outline what I think is the most natural interpretation of quantum mechanics. By natural, I simply mean that it requires the least amount of excess baggage and that it is universal in the sense that it can be consistently applied to all the observed phenomena, including the universe as a whole. I call it the “Everything is a Quantum Wave” Interpretation (EQWI) because I think this is a more appropriate name than the Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI). The paper explains why this is so.
Since the 1970s, the Everett-Wheeler many-worlds interpretation (MWI) of Quantum Mechanics (1955) has been much in the news. One wonders about the worlds in question, their branches, their splittings, their number. It is most often ignored that this language is not that of Everett, whom Wheeler very quickly stopped supporting. Moreover, for some interpreters, the real meaning of Everett ideas is not the coexistence of many worlds, but the existence of a single quantum one. In this context, what should we think of attempts to verify Everett thesis? What about the connexion between MWI and the cosmological multiverse? How to understand the links between the quantum world and the classical one? This article tries to answer some of these questions.
A brief (subjective) description of the state of the art of the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics (MWI) is presented. It is argued that the MWI is the only interpretation which removes action at a distance and randomness from quantum theory. Limitations of the MWI regarding questions of probability which can be legitimately asked are specified. The ontological picture of the MWI as a theory of the universal wave function decomposed into a superposition of world wave functions, the important parts of which are defined in three-dimensional space, is presented from the point of view of our particular branch. Some speculations about misconceptions, which apparently prevent the MWI from being in the consensus, are mentioned.
The interpretation of quantum mechanics has been disputed ever since the advent of the theory in the 1920’s. Famous are the discussions over long time between Einstein and Bohr. Einstein refused to accept the so‐called Copenhagen interpretation, where the wave function collapses at a measurement and where the outcome of the measurement is essentially accidental (“God does not play dice”). Alternative interpretations have appeared, but the Copenhagen school has dominated the thoughts throughout the decades. One interesting interpretation was formulated in 1957 by Hugh Everett at Princeton, a student of John Wheeler, which abandons the wave‐function collapse. In this model the universe is governed entirely by the Schrödinger equation, which does not allow for any collapse. In Everett’s model after a measurement the wave function is separated into different branches that do not interact. This model was left unnoticed for long time until Bryce DeWitt took it up in 1970 and termed it “Many‐Worlds Interpretation”, a term that in some sense is misleading. Everett’s model is incomplete, and it was later supplemented by the theory of decoherence, which explains how the different branches decouple as a result of the interaction with the environment. This extended model has in recent years gained increased respect, and some believe that it is the only model made available so far that is fully consistent with quantum mechanics. This interpretation can also shed some light on the development of the universe and, in particular, on the so‐called Anthropic principle, which puts human beings at the center of the development.
Quantum Mechanics, almost 80 years after its arrival, is a well established and experimentally not falsified theory. It has predicted and explained a whole series of natural phenomena of a very delicate nature. But its interpretation has not gained universal acceptance. Many scientists have considered the conceptual framework of quantum theory to be unsatisfactory. The very foundations of Quantum Mechanics is a matter that needs to be resolved in order to achieve and gain a deep physical understanding of the underlying physical procedures that constitute our world.