The philosophy of science in general, and the philosophy of physics in particular, have increasingly focused on cases of reduction and emergence in recent decades. While the paradigmatic examples arise in the context of thermodynamics and classical statistical mechanics, relevant cases have also emerged in the philosophy of quantum mechanics, such as that of quasiparticles. Traditionally, these entities have been regarded as mere mathematical tools that do not contribute to the construction of quantum ontology. However, this position has recently been challenged, and frameworks have been proposed in which some of these objects acquire a significant ontological status. In particular, phonons have been considered a case of emergence that may have either an epistemic or an ontological character. In this paper, we further enrich the discussion by emphasizing that quantum mechanics only refers to entities in the real world through the adoption of a specific interpretation. A century after the development of quantum theory, there is still no consensus on how to interpret it, and multiple competing interpretations are currently proposed. Consequently, the outcome may vary depending on the interpretation adopted. Based on this, we will show that the choice of interpretation not only influences the conceptual understanding of quantum mechanics but also determines the identification of its fundamental entities. Specifically, we will argue that, under the Modal-Hamiltonian Interpretation, phonons acquire a fundamental status, challenging the standard reading of their emergence and their relationship to quantum ontology.
The philosophy of science in general, and the philosophy of physics in particular, have increasingly focused on cases of reduction and emergence in recent decades. While the paradigmatic examples arise in the context of thermodynamics and classical statistical mechanics, relevant cases have also emerged in the philosophy of quantum mechanics, such as that of quasiparticles. Traditionally, these entities have been regarded as mere mathematical tools that do not contribute to the construction of quantum ontology. However, this position has recently been challenged, and frameworks have been proposed in which some of these objects acquire a significant ontological status. In particular, phonons have been considered a case of emergence that may have either an epistemic or an ontological character. In this paper, we further enrich the discussion by emphasizing that quantum mechanics only refers to entities in the real world through the adoption of a specific interpretation. A century after the development of quantum theory, there is still no consensus on how to interpret it, and multiple competing interpretations are currently proposed. Consequently, the outcome may vary depending on the interpretation adopted. Based on this, we will show that the choice of interpretation not only influences the conceptual understanding of quantum mechanics but also determines the identification of its fundamental entities. Specifically, we will argue that, under the Modal-Hamiltonian Interpretation, phonons acquire a fundamental status, challenging the standard reading of their emergence and their relationship to quantum ontology.
In this paper, we review Castagnino's contributions to the foundations of quantum mechanics. First, we recall his work on quantum decoherence in closed systems, and the proposal of a general framework for decoherence from which the phenomenon acquires a conceptually clear meaning. Then, we introduce his contribution to the hard field of the interpretation of quantum mechanics: the modal-Hamiltonian interpretation solves many of the interpretive problems of the theory, and manifests its physical relevance in its application to many traditional models of the practice of physics. In the third part of this work we describe the ontological picture of the quantum world that emerges from the modal-Hamiltonian interpretation, stressing the philosophical step toward a deep understanding of the reference of the theory.
According to scientific realism, science gives us an approximately true description of what the world is like. But what does it mean? In this chapter, we focus on the ontological and metaphysical aspects of this discussion. That is, we are concerned with the following questions: what there is, according to our best scientific theories? And how are these things that theories say exist? We start from the assumption that a genuine scientific realism must deal with these issues. Taking non-relativistic quantum mechanics as a case study, we discuss some of the challenges currently faced by a genuinely realistic stance. We argue, first, that in the ontological aspect, realists are in the same boat as science, that is, without sufficient epistemic justification to adopt the belief in the entities postulated by a single quantum theory, given that experience (currently) is not able to decide between rival theories; in the metaphysical aspect, realists also encounter problems with theory choice, given the possibility of associating more than one metaphysical theory with the description of the entities postulated by each quantum theory. The same goes for structuralist alternatives, since, even if we accept that scientific theories are committed to the existence of structures, but not objects, we still do not know what structures are, metaphysically. Finally, we move forward in the discussion with the meta-Popperian method, which serves to reduce the metaphysical alternatives associated with the ontological postulates of scientific theories. We may not know what the correct alternative is, but we have been able to progressively check which metaphysical alternatives are incompatible with each scientific theory.
This article is the first part of a three-part series developing Ontological Field Theory (OFT), a unified framework grounding quantum mechanics in foundational ontological principles. The trilogy is structured as follows: Part I — Conceptual Necessity:Why Quantum Mechanics Is Inevitable: Ontological Continuity and the Necessity of Quantum Dynamics establishes that quantum mechanics follows necessarily from minimal requirements on coherent being, independently of specific physical postulates. Part II — Technical Realization:Derivation of the Schrödinger Equation from Ontological Field Theory provides the explicit field-theoretic derivation showing how the Schrödinger equation emerges as the non-relativistic limit of a covariant ontological field. Part III — Critical Context:Why Classical Physics Is an Approximation: Decoherence, Coarse-Graining, and the Limits of Determinism explains why classical determinism and trajectories arise only as emergent, approximate descriptions of fundamentally quantum and relational dynamics. Each article is logically self-contained, but the full argument is distributed across the three contributions. The conceptual analysis motivates the mathematics; the mathematics grounds the physics; and the critical examination situates classical intuition as a limiting case rather than a foundation. The papers are intended to be read as a coherent whole. We argue that quantum mechanics is not an arbitrary empirical framework but an inevitable consequence of minimal ontological requirements. Assuming only that being must exist necessarily, remain consistent, be relational, and admit self-reference, we show that classical deterministic physics is structurally insufficient. Quantum dynamics emerges as the unique low-energy realization of coherent ontological continuity. This work complements explicit field-theoretic derivations by clarifying why quantum mechanics could not have been otherwise.
This book discusses the ontology in the quantum world and argues that it should be interpreted as a historicized ontology. This perspective is advocated by the quantum histories interpretation. Inspired by the nomological interpretation from Bohmian mechanics and the corresponding understanding of the law of nature and logic, the ontology will be useful to solve the difficulties of confusing ontology and perplexing logical inference. Furthermore, this book proposes that the historicized ontology can be generalized to more complicated structures and fit naturally into temporal correlation. Core philosophical issues such as the law of nature, the ontology of events, history, and processes, and the metaphysics of history are coherently discussed, revealing the profound meaning behind the formalism of quantum histories. By providing a new framework for a historicized picture of ontology, it will effectively promote the debates in the philosophy of physics and the fundamental research in quantum mechanics. This book will appeal to scholars and students of the philosophy of science, metaphysics, and quantum theory.
Quantum Mechanics (QM) has faced deep controversies and debates since its origin when Werner Heisenberg proposed the first mathematical formalism capable to operationally account for what had been recently discovered as the new field of quantum phenomena. Today, even though we have reached a standardized version of QM which is taught in Universities all around the world, there is still no consensus regarding the conceptual reference of the theory and, if or if not, it can refer to something beyond measurement outcomes. In this work we will argue that the reason behind the impossibility to reach a meaningful answer to this question is strictly related to the 20th Century Bohrian-positivist re-foundation of physics which is responsible for having introduced within the theory of quanta a harmful combination of metaphysical dogmatism and naive empiricism. We will also argue that the possibility of understanding QM is at plain sight, given we return to the original framework of physics in which the meaning of understanding has always been clear.
We present a historical-epistemological analysis of the foundations of quantum mechanics, highlighting the relationships between quantum mechanics and scientific realism, as well as the influence of the neo-positivist philosophy of the first decades of the 20th century. The great significance of the measurement process in the context of quantum mechanics is underlined as an essential element in providing a coherent description of reality, moving from micro to macrocosm, as well as the role that the measurement apparatus and the consciousness of the observer assume during the act of measurement, the related ontological problems, the question of the objectification of the wave function, and that of the definition of discernibility. We consider also an overview of the most important alternative proposals to the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics (Copenhagen interpretation), with particular reference to hidden variable theories and other alternatives to standard quantum mechanics philosophical approach, that are modifying the vision of reality, such as the Everett’s many-worlds theory, the QBism and unified holistic approaches, such as the Primordial Dynamic Space.