We develop and extend a foundational program in which physical reality isreconceived as an architecture of constraints on correlations rather than a collectionof independently existing objects. Building on the limitations establishedby Bell inequalities, the Kochen–Specker theorem, and Leggett–Garg inequalities,we argue that these results collectively mandate a shift in the ontologicalfoundations of physics: from substance ontology to what we term correlationalontology. We introduce a formal framework for generalized correlation structures,examine their relationship to the non-signaling polytope and the Tsirelsonbound, and propose a hierarchy of physical theories indexed by their permissiblecorrelation geometries. We further argue that non-observable structures — thoseunderlying but not reducible to empirical correlations — must be understood asrelational and informational rather than as hidden substates in any classicalsense. Central to our proposal is the thesis that quantum entanglement, farfrom being a genuinely non-local phenomenon, is best understood as ordinarylocality within a distinct quantum environment whose intrinsic geometry differsfrom classical Minkowski space. This reframing resolves the apparent paradoxof action-at-a-distance and deepens the structuralist realist interpretation ofquantum mechanics. Finally, we explore the epistemological implications ofthis shift, arguing that it does not entail anti-realism but rather a structuralistrealism in which the observable is a projection of a richer relational order.
We develop and extend a foundational program in which physical reality isreconceived as an architecture of constraints on correlations rather than a collectionof independently existing objects. Building on the limitations establishedby Bell inequalities, the Kochen–Specker theorem, and Leggett–Garg inequalities,we argue that these results collectively mandate a shift in the ontologicalfoundations of physics: from substance ontology to what we term correlationalontology. We introduce a formal framework for generalized correlation structures,examine their relationship to the non-signaling polytope and the Tsirelsonbound, and propose a hierarchy of physical theories indexed by their permissiblecorrelation geometries. We further argue that non-observable structures — thoseunderlying but not reducible to empirical correlations — must be understood asrelational and informational rather than as hidden substates in any classicalsense. Central to our proposal is the thesis that quantum entanglement, farfrom being a genuinely non-local phenomenon, is best understood as ordinarylocality within a distinct quantum environment whose intrinsic geometry differsfrom classical Minkowski space. This reframing resolves the apparent paradoxof action-at-a-distance and deepens the structuralist realist interpretation ofquantum mechanics. Finally, we explore the epistemological implications ofthis shift, arguing that it does not entail anti-realism but rather a structuralistrealism in which the observable is a projection of a richer relational order.
In this chapter it is argued that the decisive argument against the reducibility of causal relations comes from quantum physics. Bell’s theorem proves that no dynamics based on the local, intrinsic properties of quantum objects can yield the empirical predictions of quantum mechanics. Nonetheless, it is argued that quantum entanglement by no means implies that we have to abandon an ontology of objects in favour of an ontology of structures. All extant proposals for a quantum ontology of matter in spacetime are committed to objects, whose dynamics are determined not by their local, intrinsic properties, but by an holistic property instantiated by all the objects together—a structure that takes all the objects in the universe as its relata. The view set out in this chapter combines ontic structural realism with an ontology of objects that can be conceived as substances.
This paper presents a conceptually simple account of the EPR argument and Bell’s theorem using entangled photon polarization experiments. It clarifies how quantum correlations arise from conditioning outcomes through fundamental properties of quantum entanglement that result in conditional probability structures rather than from superluminal influences or pre-existing particle properties. Building on this analysis, the paper explores the informational and philosophical consequences of Bell violations. Hidden-variable theories are shown to entail severe informational overhead by requiring microscopic labeling of otherwise indistinguishable particles, whereas quantum mechanics encodes structure economically through relational constraints on joint outcomes. A striking but rarely-emphasized feature of Bell-type experiments is that while traditionally the geometery of the apparatus used to carry out these experiments are aligned with each other, according to quantum mechanics the physical orientations of the apparatus have no physical meaning with respect to one another at the time of measurement. The geometry is defined only locally, relative to the laboratory in which the tests is set. The essay further argues that Bell’s theorem motivates a shift from object-centered classical realism toward a form of realism referred to as “Relational Realism” wherein correlations and informational structure are ontologically primary, while objects having individual properties are contextual and derivative. This perspective dissolves the traditional realism-versus-idealism dichotomy and situates quantum mechanics as a fundamentally relational theory of physical reality rather than an incomplete classical one.
Quantum mechanics is empirically extraordinarily successful yet continues to admit a wide range of competing interpretations. While the formalism constrains probabilistic relations between preparation procedures, measurements, and outcomes, it does not uniquely determine the ontology that realises those relations. Interpretations such as Everettian quantum mechanics, Bohmian mechanics, objective collapse theories, relational quantum mechanics, and QBist approaches preserve the predictive structure of the theory while diverging sharply in their metaphysical commitments. At the same time, developments within quantum theory itself weaken the classical ontology of independently existing objects with intrinsic properties. Entanglement, violations of Bell inequalities, and decoherence theory collectively support the view that physical description is fundamentally relational. Structural realism therefore provides a natural interpretive framework, treating the mathematical structure of physical theory as ontologically primary. However, structural realism alone leaves open the question of instantiation: how relational organisation becomes concrete as a determinate world.This paper develops Experiential Structural Ontology (ESO) as a non-interventionist interpretation of quantum mechanics that addresses this problem. ESO retains the relational ontology suggested by quantum theory while proposing that relational constraint organisation is enacted as manifestation within a fundamental experiential field. On this interpretation, the wavefunction represents relational constraint architecture governing transitions within this field, measurement corresponds to the stabilisation of particular regimes within that structure, and decoherence explains the emergence of classical stability without invoking collapse dynamics or ontological branching.
As far as classical physics is concerned, it is possible to trace causal relations between physical objects (i.e. particles in this case) back to intrinsic properties of these objects (such as their mass and charge). On this view, causal relations turn out to be internal instead of external relations, supervening on intrinsic properties of the relata (as proposed by Heil and Lowe). However, one can raise doubts about this view already in Newtonian mechanics. The decisive blow to this view comes from quantum physics, with Bell’s theorem proving that no dynamics based on local, intrinsic properties of quantum objects can yield the empirical predictions of quantum mechanics. Nonetheless, quantum entanglement by no means implies that we have to abandon an ontology of objects (i.e. substances such as particles) in favour of an ontology of structures (as claimed by French and Ladyman). Any of the known proposals for a quantum ontology of matter in space-time is committed to objects. However, on any of these proposals, what determines the dynamics of these objects are not local, intrinsic properties, but a global or holistic property instantiated by all the objects together – that is, a structure that takes all the objects in the universe as its relata. The view set out in this paper thus amounts to combining ontic structural realism with an ontology of objects that can be conceived as substances. This suggestion is illustrated by drawing on the ontology of quantum physics worked out by Bohm and Bell. 1.
Bell's theorem is commonly understood as showing that no theory satisfying the relevant locality and separability assumptions can reproduce all quantum correlations. The result is often interpreted as forcing a choice among nonlocality, rejection of hidden variables, denial of measurement independence, or revision of the ontology of quantum systems. This paper develops a philosophy-facing interpretation of Bell correlations within the Geometric Monism (GM) framework. GM models quantum entities as continuous torsional standing-wave structures embedded in a 5-dimensional geometric manifold governed by a universal Planck Stiffness \(\kT=c^4/G\). The central proposal is that Bell-type correlations are best understood, within GM, not as superluminal influences between independent particles, but as boundary projections of a single non-separable geometric entity. The paper does not dispute Bell's theorem, nor does it propose a controllable signaling mechanism. Instead, it examines which ontological assumption fails if entangled systems are not fundamentally composed of separable particle-like subsystems. In GM, an entangled pair is represented as a globally constrained torsional structure whose localized detection events occur at 4-dimensional measurement boundaries. On this view, Bell factorizability fails because the joint system is not decomposable into two independent local beables connected only by a shared hidden variable. The relevant ontology is one continuous non-separable entity with multiple boundary-accessible nodes. The analysis compares GM with standard interpretations of Bell's theorem, including local hidden-variable theories, Bohmian mechanics, Everettian approaches, and operational no-signaling views. It argues that GM occupies a distinct philosophical position: it accepts Bell's mathematical result, preserves no-signaling, rejects point-particle separability, and interprets quantum correlations as arising from continuous geometric non-separability. The paper is intended as a philosophy of physics proposal, not as a replacement for the quantum formalism or a completed physical derivation of Bell correlations.
Quantum mechanics has transformed our understanding of reality, yet deep philosophical puzzles remain unresolved. Is there a consistent way to describe quantum measurement, the emergence of space and time, and the role of observers within one coherent ontology? This paper introduces Relational Quantum Dynamics (RQD), an interpretation that places relationships and information—not isolated objects—at the foundation of physics. Unlike traditional views, such as the Copenhagen interpretation, Everett’s many-worlds theory, or hidden-variable approaches, RQD denies a single observer-independent reality, instead proposing that facts only become definite within specific observational contexts. It explicitly addresses foundational no-go results, including Bell’s theorem, the Kochen–Specker theorem, and the Frauchiger–Renner paradox, by replacing absolute facts with relational, context-dependent truths. RQD rests on five interlocking principles: (1) quantum states are contextual and observer-relative, (2) time emerges from quantum interactions rather than existing as an external parameter, (3) space is constructed from patterns of quantum entanglement, (4) observers emerge as systems with highly integrated information, and (5) classical reality appears through quantum decoherence without special wavefunction collapse. Philosophically, RQD aligns with ontic structural realism, proposing that the fundamental ontology of the universe consists entirely of informational relations. It avoids collapsing into relativism or solipsism by ensuring intersubjective agreement through physical interactions. Ultimately, RQD may offer a unified picture in which quantum mechanics, spacetime, and observers are no longer separate domains but aspects of one interconnected informational web.