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

Scientific Reports

Tensorial quantum mechanics

Christian DE RONDE, Raimundo Fernández Mouján, César Massri

Published Apr 2, 2026• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

In July 1925, exactly one century ago, Werner Heisenberg created Quantum Mechanics (QM) as an invariant-operational formalism by taking as a standpoint the intensive patterns that had been already observed by experimentalists in the lab. One of the few drawbacks of this proposal was the impossibility to conceptualize it in classical terms. Attempting to restore a somewhat classical spatiotemporal representation, six months later, Erwin Schrödinger would present a formalism grounded on a wave equation in configuration space. Taking as a standpoint Schrödinger’s wave mechanics together with the methodological guide of Bohr and logical positivists, Dirac would present in 1930 an axiomatic re-formulation of the theory of quanta that would become known as the “standard” version of QM (SQM). This new version of the theory, that is still today taught in physics classrooms all around the world, would become accepted regardless of its inconsistent narrative as a “recipe” intended (but unable) to predict (binary) measurement outcomes. After pointing out some of the many problems of SQM, in this work we propose to go back to Heisenberg’s matrix mechanics (and also to his understanding of physical theories). We will argue that his matrix mechanics, as an operationally-invariant standpoint, opens the door to a tensorial enlargement of the mathematical formalism capable to account for new phenomena.

DOI
10.1038/s41598-025-30083-5

Related papers

Tensorial Quantum Mechanics: Back to Heisenberg and Beyond

Christian DE RONDE, Raimundo Fernández Mouján, César Massri

In this work we discuss the establishment of Standard Quantum Mechanics (SQM) developed through Schrödinger's and Dirac's wave-vectorial reformulations of Heisenberg's original matrix mechanics. We will argue that while Heisenberg's approach was consistently developed -- taking as a standpoint the intensive patterns that were observed in the lab -- as an invariant-operational formalism, Dirac's axiomatic re-formulation was, instead, developed -- taking as a standpoint Schrödinger's wave mechanics and the methodological guide of Bohr and logical positivists -- as an essentially inconsistent "recipe" intended (but unable) to predict (binary) measurement outcomes. Leaving SQM behind and attempting to restore the consistent and coherent account of a real state of affairs, we will present a new tensorial proposal which -- taking as a standpoint Heisenberg's original approach -- will prove capable not only to extend the matrix formalism to a tensorial representation but also to account for new experimental phenomena.

arXiv:2410.09535•Oct 12, 2024•0 citations

Understanding Quantum Mechanics (Beyond Metaphysical Dogmatism and Naive Empiricism)

Christian DE RONDE

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.

arXiv:2009.00487•Sep 1, 2020•2 citations

Multi-Screen Entanglement in Tensorial Quantum Mechanics

Christian DE RONDE, Raimundo Fernández Mouján, César Massri

In this work we present an invariant-objective formalization of multi screen-entanglement grounded on Tensorial Quantum Mechanics (TQM) [12]. This new tensorial formulation of the theory of quanta -- basically, an extension of Heisenberg's matrix mechanics -- allows not only to escape the many problems present in the current account of multi-partite entanglement grounded on the Dirac-Von Neumann Standard formulation of Quantum Mechanics (SQM) but, more importantly, to consistently represent entanglement phenomena when considering a multiplicity of different screens and detectors.

arXiv:2412.04397•Dec 5, 2024•0 citations

Introduction

Peter Mittelstaedt

Measurement-induced interrelations between quantum mechanics and its interpretation The development of quantum mechanics The formalism of quantum mechanics was developed within the very short period of a few months in 1925 and 1926 by Heisenberg [Heis 25] and by Schrodinger [Schrö 26], respectively. Together with the contributions of Born and Jordan [BoJo 26], [BHJ 26], Dirac [Dir 26] and others, the formalism of this theory was already brought in 1926 into its final form, which is still used in present-day text books. (For all details of the historical development, we refer to the monograph by M. Jammer [Jam 74].) It is a very remarkable fact that a theory which was formulated 70 years ago has never been corrected or improved and is still considered to be valid. Numerous experiments performed during this long period to test the theory have confirmed it to a very high degree of accuracy without any exception. Hence there are good reasons to believe that quantum mechanics is universally valid and can be applied to all domains of reality, i.e., to atoms, molecules, macroscopic bodies, and to the whole universe. However, the interpretation of the new theory was at the time of its mathematical formulation still an almost open problem. Any interpretation of quantum theory should provide interrelations between the theoretical expressions of the theory and possible experimental outcomes.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Dec 4, 1997•0 citations

Wherefore Quantum Mechanics?

S. P. Boughn

After the development of a self-consistent quantum formalism nearly a century ago, there ensued a quest to understand the often counterintuitive predictions of the theory. These endeavors invariably begin with the assumption of the "truth" of the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics and then proceed to investigate the theory's implications for the physical world. One of the outcomes has been endless discussions of the quantum measurement problem, wave/particle duality, the non-locality of entangled quantum states, Schroedinger's cat, and other philosophical conundrums. In this essay, I take the point of view that quantum mechanics is a mathematical model, a human invention, and rather than pondering what the theory implies about our world, I consider the transposed question: what is it about our world that leads us to a quantum mechanical model of it? One consequence is the realization that discrete quanta, the quantum of action in particular, leads to the wave nature and statistical behavior of matter rather than the other way around.

arXiv:1910.08069•Jan 1, 2019•0 citations

Creating Quantum Mechanics

Frank S. Levin

Abstract In addition to recounting some contemporary scientific history, Chapter 6 describes the hypothesis that matter, like light, can display wavelike properties, and the creation of the various formulations of quantum mechanics. That matter could have a wavelength was proposed in 1924 by Louis de Broglie, who presented a specific formula for calculating it, one that was verified experimentally in 1927. However, de Broglie’s hypothesis was overshadowed by the creation of three versions of quantum mechanics in 1925/26. The first, denoted matrix mechanics, was proposed by Werner Heisenberg. It was quickly and successfully applied by Wolfgang Pauli to the hydrogen atom. Paul Dirac introduced the next version, which was followed by that of Erwin Schrödinger via a wave equation whose solutions, denoted wave functions, were soon interpreted byMax Born to be related to the probability that certain outcomes or events will occur: classical-physics determinism was thereby removed from quantum mechanics.

•Sep 21, 2017•0 citations
In July 1925, exactly one century ago, Werner Heisenberg created Quantum Mechanics (QM) as an invariant-operational formalism by taking as a standpoint the intensive patterns that had been already observed by experimentalists in the lab. One of the few drawbacks of this proposal was the impossibility to conceptualize it in classical terms. Attempting to restore a somewhat classical spatiotemporal representation, six months later, Erwin Schrödinger would present a formalism grounded on a wave equation in configuration space. Taking as a standpoint Schrödinger’s wave mechanics together with the methodological guide of Bohr and logical positivists, Dirac would present in 1930 an axiomatic re-formulation of the theory of quanta that would become known as the “standard” version of QM (SQM). This new version of the theory, that is still today taught in physics classrooms all around the world, would become accepted regardless of its inconsistent narrative as a “recipe” intended (but unable) to predict (binary) measurement outcomes. After pointing out some of the many problems of SQM, in this work we propose to go back to Heisenberg’s matrix mechanics (and also to his understanding of physical theories). We will argue that his matrix mechanics, as an operationally-invariant standpoint, opens the door to a tensorial enlargement of the mathematical formalism capable to account for new phenomena.
In this work we discuss the establishment of Standard Quantum Mechanics (SQM) developed through Schrödinger's and Dirac's wave-vectorial reformulations of Heisenberg's original matrix mechanics. We will argue that while Heisenberg's approach was consistently developed -- taking as a standpoint the intensive patterns that were observed in the lab -- as an invariant-operational formalism, Dirac's axiomatic re-formulation was, instead, developed -- taking as a standpoint Schrödinger's wave mechanics and the methodological guide of Bohr and logical positivists -- as an essentially inconsistent "recipe" intended (but unable) to predict (binary) measurement outcomes. Leaving SQM behind and attempting to restore the consistent and coherent account of a real state of affairs, we will present a new tensorial proposal which -- taking as a standpoint Heisenberg's original approach -- will prove capable not only to extend the matrix formalism to a tensorial representation but also to account for new experimental phenomena.
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.
In this work we present an invariant-objective formalization of multi screen-entanglement grounded on Tensorial Quantum Mechanics (TQM) [12]. This new tensorial formulation of the theory of quanta -- basically, an extension of Heisenberg's matrix mechanics -- allows not only to escape the many problems present in the current account of multi-partite entanglement grounded on the Dirac-Von Neumann Standard formulation of Quantum Mechanics (SQM) but, more importantly, to consistently represent entanglement phenomena when considering a multiplicity of different screens and detectors.
Measurement-induced interrelations between quantum mechanics and its interpretation The development of quantum mechanics The formalism of quantum mechanics was developed within the very short period of a few months in 1925 and 1926 by Heisenberg [Heis 25] and by Schrodinger [Schrö 26], respectively. Together with the contributions of Born and Jordan [BoJo 26], [BHJ 26], Dirac [Dir 26] and others, the formalism of this theory was already brought in 1926 into its final form, which is still used in present-day text books. (For all details of the historical development, we refer to the monograph by M. Jammer [Jam 74].) It is a very remarkable fact that a theory which was formulated 70 years ago has never been corrected or improved and is still considered to be valid. Numerous experiments performed during this long period to test the theory have confirmed it to a very high degree of accuracy without any exception. Hence there are good reasons to believe that quantum mechanics is universally valid and can be applied to all domains of reality, i.e., to atoms, molecules, macroscopic bodies, and to the whole universe. However, the interpretation of the new theory was at the time of its mathematical formulation still an almost open problem. Any interpretation of quantum theory should provide interrelations between the theoretical expressions of the theory and possible experimental outcomes.
After the development of a self-consistent quantum formalism nearly a century ago, there ensued a quest to understand the often counterintuitive predictions of the theory. These endeavors invariably begin with the assumption of the "truth" of the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics and then proceed to investigate the theory's implications for the physical world. One of the outcomes has been endless discussions of the quantum measurement problem, wave/particle duality, the non-locality of entangled quantum states, Schroedinger's cat, and other philosophical conundrums. In this essay, I take the point of view that quantum mechanics is a mathematical model, a human invention, and rather than pondering what the theory implies about our world, I consider the transposed question: what is it about our world that leads us to a quantum mechanical model of it? One consequence is the realization that discrete quanta, the quantum of action in particular, leads to the wave nature and statistical behavior of matter rather than the other way around.
Abstract In addition to recounting some contemporary scientific history, Chapter 6 describes the hypothesis that matter, like light, can display wavelike properties, and the creation of the various formulations of quantum mechanics. That matter could have a wavelength was proposed in 1924 by Louis de Broglie, who presented a specific formula for calculating it, one that was verified experimentally in 1927. However, de Broglie’s hypothesis was overshadowed by the creation of three versions of quantum mechanics in 1925/26. The first, denoted matrix mechanics, was proposed by Werner Heisenberg. It was quickly and successfully applied by Wolfgang Pauli to the hydrogen atom. Paul Dirac introduced the next version, which was followed by that of Erwin Schrödinger via a wave equation whose solutions, denoted wave functions, were soon interpreted byMax Born to be related to the probability that certain outcomes or events will occur: classical-physics determinism was thereby removed from quantum mechanics.