Logica Quanta III completes the Logica Quanta trilogy by translating accumulated wave interference from a conceptual and mechanistic proposal into a set of explicit, falsifiable experimental predictions. Building on Logica Quanta I, which reframed physics as interacting waves, and Logica Quanta II, which identified accumulated interference as the physical origin of collapse, this paper asks a single empirical question: if accumulated interference is real, where should it appear? The paper identifies history-dependent (hysteretic) signatures that are forbidden by standard, memoryless formulations of quantum mechanics. These include deviations in tunneling statistics, polarization dynamics, decoherence rates, and weak-interaction phase evolution under sustained wave–environment coupling. No new particles, forces, or speculative assumptions are introduced. The proposed tests rely exclusively on existing experimental platforms such as Josephson junctions, magneto-optic systems, superconducting qubits, and long-baseline weak-interaction experiments. Logica Quanta III is intentionally conservative: it specifies where accumulated interference must manifest—and how it can be decisively falsified—if collapse is a dynamical consequence of wave history rather than an instantaneous postulate.
Light quanta The history of the corpuscular and wave controversy in optical theory is well known. At the end of the last century physicists had no doubt as to the wave character of light, and the acceptance of the wave theory meant the rejection of the corpuscular theory. The possibility of both being correct and helpful to one another had not been much thought about and still less explored. At about this time Planck's quantum theory appeared and was soon followed in 1905 by Einstein's theory of ‘light quanta’ to explain the photo-electric effect, for which the wave theory alone had utterly failed to account. Einstein assumed that radiation exists in discrete ‘quanta’ of energy hν , where ν is the frequency; thus a quantum is a separate thing, like a corpuscle, and has a frequency associated with it, like a wave. There was a blend of the two older theories involved. This idea has been generalised by the speculations of Louis de Broglie, who pointed out the important clue given by the theory of relativity, namely, that of the identity of mass and energy, so that the conservation of mass is therefore also the conservation of energy. This suggested to him that all forms of energy (including radiation) should have an atomic structure, like matter; and that the atoms of energy are grouped round certain singular points, forming electrons, light quanta, and the like.
Abstract After forty years of EPR experiments, it appears on the face of the experimental facts that one of the oldest ideas in Physics has been falsified, namely the retarded interaction paradigm, the notion that long range interactions between quanta, or equivalently causal influences between point events, are mediated by physical entities - fields, particles or “causal influences” in general - that travel through space from one point to the other at or below the characteristic velocity, c. A critical examination of this basic idea shows it to be unsatisfactory in all respects. An alternative is then proposed that satisfies both causality and local action, “distributed action”, which is germane to local realist field models of the quanta, where matter and energy extend in space and interact locally and causally at all locations where they overlap. Bell Inequalities cannot be derived in this context because, with distributed fieldfield interactions, spacelike separation of events does not guarantee the fundamental “no influence” assumption from which all the various Bell Inequalities are derived. Distributed action thus explains what appears to us as instantaneous action at a distance. PACS: 03.65.Ud 03.75.-b