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

CRC Press eBooks

The Unnecessary ‘Collapse of the Wave Function’

F. J. Duarte

Published Apr 10, 2026• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

‘The collapse of the wave function’ was first introduced as an explanatory concept by Heisenberg. Then it was ‘formalized’ by von Neumann, in his book Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics . Essentially, this concept says that at the moment of measurement the superposition probability amplitude collapses to a single quantum state. In quantum interference and quantum entanglement, it is found that this hypothetical reduction to a single quantum state is an unnecessary intermediate step that provides no further information to the experimentalist. Indeed, in quantum interference the measurement sequence goes from superposition probability amplitude to multiplication of this superposition probability amplitude with its complex conjugate which yields the probability distribution, in short: https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> 〈 d | s 〉 → 〈 d | s 〉 〈 d | s 〉 ∗ . A hypothetical ‘collapse of the wave function’ adds an unobservable, unmeasurable, intermediate step that in the case of N -slit quantum interference would lead to the prediction of an erroneous probability distribution. Indeed, https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> 〈 d | s 〉 → 〈 d | s 〉 〈 d | s 〉 ∗ represents a direct and clear mathematical expansion . The same is the case in quantum entanglement.

DOI
10.1201/9781003649434-26

Related papers

N-slit interference and ‘the collapse of the wave function’

Francisco Duarte

It is explained that, in an N-slit experimental configuration the so called ‘collapse of the wave function’ is an unnecessary concept. The explanation begins going back to the original words of Heisenberg on the reduction of the wave packet and continues while considering the measurement process in an N-slit interferometer. In this regard, it is articulated that a clean and direct transition from the superposition probability amplitude to the probability distribution is all that is needed. The discussion includes measurable decoherence in the interferometric domain and the Diósi-Penrose hypothesis.

•Jul 10, 2026•0 citations

N-slit interference and ‘the collapse of the wave function’

Francisco Duarte

It is explained that, in an N-slit experimental configuration the so called ‘collapse of the wave function’ is an unnecessary concept. The explanation begins going back to the original words of Heisenberg on the reduction of the wave packet and continues while considering the measurement process in an N-slit interferometer. In this regard, it is articulated that a clean and direct transition from the superposition probability amplitude to the probability distribution is all that is needed. The discussion includes measurable decoherence in the interferometric domain and the Diósi-Penrose hypothesis.

•Aug 4, 2026•0 citations

N-slit interference and ‘the collapse of the wave function’

Francisco Duarte

It is explained that, in an N-slit experimental configuration the so called ‘collapse of the wave function’ is an unnecessary concept. The explanation begins going back to the original words of Heisenberg on the reduction of the wave packet and continues while considering the measurement process in an N-slit interferometer. In this regard, it is articulated that a clean and direct transition from the superposition probability amplitude to the probability distribution is all that is needed. The discussion includes measurable decoherence in the interferometric domain and the Diósi-Penrose hypothesis.

•Jul 10, 2026•0 citations

Born's Rule and Quantum Probabilities

F. J. Duarte

In quantum mechanics, the physics of probability amplitudes, that exists in the imaginary and complex mathematical realm, is brought to the measurable realm by the iconic Born rule https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> | ψ 〉 | ψ 〉 ∗ = | | ψ 〉 | 2 that convert the superposition probability amplitude https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> | ψ 〉 into a measurable interferometric probability distribution. When Born first introduced his rule, in 1926, he did so in the absence of a physical derivation. In fact, Born never offered a derivation for his most crucial rule. In this chapter a transparent interferometric derivation of Born's rule is given. Furthermore, it is indicated that far from a ‘collapse’ the https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> | ψ 〉 → | ψ 〉 | ψ 〉 ∗ transition, for interferometric configurations, clearly involves a mathematical expansion . The https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> | ψ 〉 → | ψ 〉 | ψ 〉 ∗ transition for quantum entanglement is also discussed.

CRC Press eBooks•Apr 10, 2026•0 citations

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle

F. J. Duarte

Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is one of the unique and iconic features of quantum mechanics that distinctly separates this physics, based on indeterminacy, from any and all classical deterministic theories. Besides its succinct utter beauty, https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> Δ x Δ p ≈ h , as articulated by Feynman ‘it protects quantum mechanics.’ In addition to its foundational importance and ‘protection’ function, the uncertainty principle plays crucial experimental roles in the measurement of coherent emission linewidth https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> Δ ν and in determining the nonlocality of the photon via measurements of coherence length https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> Δ x . Physically, it can be shown that https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> Δ x Δ p ≈ h has its origin in the physics of measurable interferometric quantum probability distributions. This insight teaches us that, unlike probability amplitudes, https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> Δ x Δ p ≈ h firmly resides in the measurable realm.

CRC Press eBooks•Apr 10, 2026•0 citations

The Feynman Path Integral

N. Cabibbo, Luciano Maiani, Omar Benhar A

This Chapter introduces the Feynman Path Integral description of quantum transition amplitudes, considering the simplest case of a quantum system described by one quantum variable q and its conjugate momentum p . The transition amplitude from time https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> t 1 to time https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> t 2 = t 1 + T is obtained by discretising the time axis in N time steps of amplitude https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> ϵ , implying T=N https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> ϵ . For https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> ϵ → 0 , the Feynman Path Integral formula is derived: https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> < q N | e - i T H / ℏ | q 0 > = ∫ d [ q ( t ) ] e i S q ( t ) , q ' ( t ) / ℏ , where integration is over all trajectories https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> q ( t ) which satisfy the boundary conditions at https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> t 1 and t 2 . https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> S ( q , q ' ) is the classical Action, a function of https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> q and of its time derivative. The classical limit, corresponding to https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> ℏ → 0 , is considered, whereby the solution of the Feynman Path Integral reduces to the classical trajectory, https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> q c ( t ) , which minimises the classical Action. The lattice approximation , i.e. small, non vanishing https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> ϵ , with evaluation of the Feynman integral by numerical integration, provides a useful approximation in the case of the fundamental theory of the strong interactions (Quantum Chromodynamics, or QCD), to be considered later; Chapters 17 to19. This chapter is completed by consideration of the extension of gthe formalism to imaginary time, where the Feynman Path Integral becomes the Partition Function of Statistical Mechanics, and by the definition of the Green's functions, ground-state expectation values of products of quantum operators q(t) taken at different times, https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> t 1 , t 2 … t N .

CRC Press eBooks•Oct 22, 2025•0 citations
‘The collapse of the wave function’ was first introduced as an explanatory concept by Heisenberg. Then it was ‘formalized’ by von Neumann, in his book Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics . Essentially, this concept says that at the moment of measurement the superposition probability amplitude collapses to a single quantum state. In quantum interference and quantum entanglement, it is found that this hypothetical reduction to a single quantum state is an unnecessary intermediate step that provides no further information to the experimentalist. Indeed, in quantum interference the measurement sequence goes from superposition probability amplitude to multiplication of this superposition probability amplitude with its complex conjugate which yields the probability distribution, in short: https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> 〈 d | s 〉 → 〈 d | s 〉 〈 d | s 〉 ∗ . A hypothetical ‘collapse of the wave function’ adds an unobservable, unmeasurable, intermediate step that in the case of N -slit quantum interference would lead to the prediction of an erroneous probability distribution. Indeed, https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> 〈 d | s 〉 → 〈 d | s 〉 〈 d | s 〉 ∗ represents a direct and clear mathematical expansion . The same is the case in quantum entanglement.
It is explained that, in an N-slit experimental configuration the so called ‘collapse of the wave function’ is an unnecessary concept. The explanation begins going back to the original words of Heisenberg on the reduction of the wave packet and continues while considering the measurement process in an N-slit interferometer. In this regard, it is articulated that a clean and direct transition from the superposition probability amplitude to the probability distribution is all that is needed. The discussion includes measurable decoherence in the interferometric domain and the Diósi-Penrose hypothesis.
It is explained that, in an N-slit experimental configuration the so called ‘collapse of the wave function’ is an unnecessary concept. The explanation begins going back to the original words of Heisenberg on the reduction of the wave packet and continues while considering the measurement process in an N-slit interferometer. In this regard, it is articulated that a clean and direct transition from the superposition probability amplitude to the probability distribution is all that is needed. The discussion includes measurable decoherence in the interferometric domain and the Diósi-Penrose hypothesis.
It is explained that, in an N-slit experimental configuration the so called ‘collapse of the wave function’ is an unnecessary concept. The explanation begins going back to the original words of Heisenberg on the reduction of the wave packet and continues while considering the measurement process in an N-slit interferometer. In this regard, it is articulated that a clean and direct transition from the superposition probability amplitude to the probability distribution is all that is needed. The discussion includes measurable decoherence in the interferometric domain and the Diósi-Penrose hypothesis.
In quantum mechanics, the physics of probability amplitudes, that exists in the imaginary and complex mathematical realm, is brought to the measurable realm by the iconic Born rule https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> | ψ 〉 | ψ 〉 ∗ = | | ψ 〉 | 2 that convert the superposition probability amplitude https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> | ψ 〉 into a measurable interferometric probability distribution. When Born first introduced his rule, in 1926, he did so in the absence of a physical derivation. In fact, Born never offered a derivation for his most crucial rule. In this chapter a transparent interferometric derivation of Born's rule is given. Furthermore, it is indicated that far from a ‘collapse’ the https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> | ψ 〉 → | ψ 〉 | ψ 〉 ∗ transition, for interferometric configurations, clearly involves a mathematical expansion . The https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> | ψ 〉 → | ψ 〉 | ψ 〉 ∗ transition for quantum entanglement is also discussed.
Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is one of the unique and iconic features of quantum mechanics that distinctly separates this physics, based on indeterminacy, from any and all classical deterministic theories. Besides its succinct utter beauty, https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> Δ x Δ p ≈ h , as articulated by Feynman ‘it protects quantum mechanics.’ In addition to its foundational importance and ‘protection’ function, the uncertainty principle plays crucial experimental roles in the measurement of coherent emission linewidth https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> Δ ν and in determining the nonlocality of the photon via measurements of coherence length https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> Δ x . Physically, it can be shown that https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> Δ x Δ p ≈ h has its origin in the physics of measurable interferometric quantum probability distributions. This insight teaches us that, unlike probability amplitudes, https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> Δ x Δ p ≈ h firmly resides in the measurable realm.
This Chapter introduces the Feynman Path Integral description of quantum transition amplitudes, considering the simplest case of a quantum system described by one quantum variable q and its conjugate momentum p . The transition amplitude from time https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> t 1 to time https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> t 2 = t 1 + T is obtained by discretising the time axis in N time steps of amplitude https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> ϵ , implying T=N https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> ϵ . For https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> ϵ → 0 , the Feynman Path Integral formula is derived: https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> < q N | e - i T H / ℏ | q 0 > = ∫ d [ q ( t ) ] e i S q ( t ) , q ' ( t ) / ℏ , where integration is over all trajectories https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> q ( t ) which satisfy the boundary conditions at https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> t 1 and t 2 . https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> S ( q , q ' ) is the classical Action, a function of https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> q and of its time derivative. The classical limit, corresponding to https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> ℏ → 0 , is considered, whereby the solution of the Feynman Path Integral reduces to the classical trajectory, https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> q c ( t ) , which minimises the classical Action. The lattice approximation , i.e. small, non vanishing https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> ϵ , with evaluation of the Feynman integral by numerical integration, provides a useful approximation in the case of the fundamental theory of the strong interactions (Quantum Chromodynamics, or QCD), to be considered later; Chapters 17 to19. This chapter is completed by consideration of the extension of gthe formalism to imaginary time, where the Feynman Path Integral becomes the Partition Function of Statistical Mechanics, and by the definition of the Green's functions, ground-state expectation values of products of quantum operators q(t) taken at different times, https://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> t 1 , t 2 … t N .