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

Springer eBooks

Quantum theory and pictures of reality : foundations, interpretations, and new aspects

Wolfram Schommers, Bernard d’Espagnat

Published Jan 1, 1989• 9 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/978-3-642-95570-9

Related papers

Quantum Theory and Pictures of Reality

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 1989•59 citations

Epilogue

Sudip Patra, Menas C. Kafatos

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.

Routledge eBooks•May 26, 2026•0 citations

Quantum Theory and Reality

Bunge, Mario

Studies in the foundations methodology and philosophy of science•Jan 1, 1967•141 citations

An Examination Of The Philosophical Foundations Of Quantum Theory

Cranston, Julius Byron, Jr.

Beginning in 1900 with 1-iax Planck's hypothesis of quanta, physics has been embarked on a course which has raised serious questions about the true nature of physical reality, about the foundational assumptions and structures of science, and about the relationships between physical reality and physical theory. In particular, attempts to give a physical interpretation to quantum theory seem to result in "pictures" of nature which are paradoxical. A subatomic entity is described by the theory as exhibiting the properties and behavior of both particle-like phenomena and wave­like phenomena. Since it seems unreasonable that a single entity could be both a point-like mass and a wave spread out through a region of space, quantum theory would seem to be less than satisfactory or less than complete at the interpretational level. The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the underlying causes of this paradox. The dissertation proceeds by reviewing the development of quantum theory and the emergence of the paradox. Next, the prob­lem of physical interpretation is examined and several of the more significant existing interpretations are discussed and analyzed. Finally, the foundations of science and the general structure of scientific theory are examined in a search for the origins of the paradox. As a result of these investigations and analyses, it is con­cluded that the paradoxical nature of the physical interpretation of quantum theory is the consequence of certain paradigms and preconceptualizations about physical reality which have been incorporated into the theory at the foundational level. These fundamental assU14p­tions produce, within quantum theory, a forced marriage of the plenum and atomic views of physical reality. They also produce an ambiguity with respect to the nature of causality which is charaeteristic of the theory. These problems are reflected in the mathematical formalisms and physical concepts of the theory as well as in its meta­physical foundations. Lastly, methods of resoling the paradox are discussed. It is argued that a successful solution is possible, but that it would involve the creation of a new metaphor-an extension of the present language--which would lead science to a deeper, subquantum level in terms of which the present paradox would vanish.

•Dec 12, 1975•0 citations

Is Quantum Mechanics a Complete Theory?: A Philosophical Defense of Einstein's Position

U O Egbai

In 1935, Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen published their thought experiment I a paper entitled, “Can Quantum – Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be considered complete?”. At that time, Bohr, Heisenberg, and the proponents of the Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum mechanics, were saying that Quantum theory is a complete and the last theory in physics event though it does not provide any picture of the world separate from our observations of it. The message Einstein conveyed to his colleagues was that the quantum theory is not a “complete” theory because it does not describe certain important aspects of reality which are physically real event if they are not observed. In sympathy with Einstein's position, this paper argues that, the real nature of physical reality cannot be explained “at once” by a single theory. Reality is still unfolding and a new theory that will surpass the predictive ability of Quantum Mechanics will soon emerge. SOPHIA: An African Journal of Philosophy Vol. 8 (2) 2006: pp.14-19

Sophia An African Journal of Philosophy•Aug 24, 2007•0 citations

Interpretation of Reality and Quantum Theory

WORLD SCIENTIFIC eBooks•May 1, 2003•0 citations
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.
Beginning in 1900 with 1-iax Planck's hypothesis of quanta, physics has been embarked on a course which has raised serious questions about the true nature of physical reality, about the foundational assumptions and structures of science, and about the relationships between physical reality and physical theory. In particular, attempts to give a physical interpretation to quantum theory seem to result in "pictures" of nature which are paradoxical. A subatomic entity is described by the theory as exhibiting the properties and behavior of both particle-like phenomena and wave­like phenomena. Since it seems unreasonable that a single entity could be both a point-like mass and a wave spread out through a region of space, quantum theory would seem to be less than satisfactory or less than complete at the interpretational level. The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the underlying causes of this paradox. The dissertation proceeds by reviewing the development of quantum theory and the emergence of the paradox. Next, the prob­lem of physical interpretation is examined and several of the more significant existing interpretations are discussed and analyzed. Finally, the foundations of science and the general structure of scientific theory are examined in a search for the origins of the paradox. As a result of these investigations and analyses, it is con­cluded that the paradoxical nature of the physical interpretation of quantum theory is the consequence of certain paradigms and preconceptualizations about physical reality which have been incorporated into the theory at the foundational level. These fundamental assU14p­tions produce, within quantum theory, a forced marriage of the plenum and atomic views of physical reality. They also produce an ambiguity with respect to the nature of causality which is charaeteristic of the theory. These problems are reflected in the mathematical formalisms and physical concepts of the theory as well as in its meta­physical foundations. Lastly, methods of resoling the paradox are discussed. It is argued that a successful solution is possible, but that it would involve the creation of a new metaphor-an extension of the present language--which would lead science to a deeper, subquantum level in terms of which the present paradox would vanish.
In 1935, Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen published their thought experiment I a paper entitled, “Can Quantum – Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be considered complete?”. At that time, Bohr, Heisenberg, and the proponents of the Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum mechanics, were saying that Quantum theory is a complete and the last theory in physics event though it does not provide any picture of the world separate from our observations of it. The message Einstein conveyed to his colleagues was that the quantum theory is not a “complete” theory because it does not describe certain important aspects of reality which are physically real event if they are not observed. In sympathy with Einstein's position, this paper argues that, the real nature of physical reality cannot be explained “at once” by a single theory. Reality is still unfolding and a new theory that will surpass the predictive ability of Quantum Mechanics will soon emerge. SOPHIA: An African Journal of Philosophy Vol. 8 (2) 2006: pp.14-19