What Returns: On the significance of interpretation for modern physics

Timothy Rogers

Published Jun 8, 2026• 0 citations

Abstract

Why do the deepest tensions in modern physics persist despite a century of mathematical refinement? Perhaps unresolved questions are not always signs of failure. Sometimes they point toward distinctions we have not yet learned to see.

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20596592

Related papers

Are there unsolved problems in the interpretation of quantum mechanics?

Roland L. Omnes

Springer eBooksApr 7, 20089 citations

The Quantum Observer Problem: Understanding Science in the Face of Unresolved Questions

Shahrudin Zakaria, Norazlina Abd Razak, Sulaiman Sabikan +3 more

Scientific progress does not always remove difficult conceptual questions about knowledge, reality, and observation. Quantum mechanics is one of the most successful theories in modern science, yet its development has raised persistent questions concerning measurement, observation, and quantum reality. Despite extensive theoretical and experimental progress, the measurement problem remains unresolved and continues to generate different interpretations. This paper examines what this unresolved problem reveals about scientific understanding and how people may approach unresolved scientific questions when established knowledge does not provide a final answer. The discussion uses a conceptual approach, drawing on selected historical and theoretical work and experiments related to the measurement and observer problem. The paper highlights how competing interpretations can remain open while established applications continue to work

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social ScienceJan 1, 20260 citations

The Problem of Interpretation of Modern Physics

Peter Mittelstaedt

Foundations of PhysicsJun 1, 20118 citations

The Kinematic Phase Transition: Deriving Wave-Particle Duality from the Fractal Density Constant ()

Enkhamgalan Nasanjargal

For nearly a century, the standard formulation of quantum mechanics has relied upon the probabilistic interpretation of physical states, fundamentally utilizing the wavefunction () to describe the position, momentum, and state of sub-atomic entities as a distribution of statistical likelihoods. The Copenhagen interpretation, which posits that physical systems do not possess definite properties prior to measurement, has served as the operational foundation of modern quantum physics. However, this stochastic abstraction has persistently generated profound epistemological and physical paradoxes, most notably the unresolved nature of wavefunction collapse and the mathematical friction encountered when attempting to unify quantum mechanics with the deterministic, continuous manifold of general relativity.

Mar 25, 20260 citations

The philosophical interpretation of contemporary physics

E. Kolman

Studies in East European ThoughtFeb 1, 19800 citations

Reinterpreting 24 Foundational Paradoxes: A Methodological and Ontological Analysis

Erik Axelkrans

Foundational paradoxes continue to persist in modern physics despite the remarkableempirical success of established theories. These paradoxes do not arise from failed predictionsor mathematical inconsistency, but from recurring conceptual tensions across quantummechanics, gravity, cosmology, and questions of identity, causality, and emergence.This paper examines twenty-four well-known paradoxes spanning these domains andproposes a unified resolution strategy. The analysis is methodological rather than technical:no new dynamics, particles, or forces are introduced, and no modifications to establishedformalisms are required. Instead, the paradoxes are shown to arise from a systematicconflation of descriptive levels, in which constructs native to effective theories are tacitlytreated as ontologically fundamental.By interpreting established theories as projection-level descriptions constrained by domain-specific validity, the paradoxes admit concise and uniform resolutions. Across all cases, themathematical frameworks remain intact; what changes is the interpretation of their ontologicalreach. The recurrence of this resolution pattern across independent and historically distinctparadoxes provides strong support for an ontological distinction between generative structureand effective physical description, articulated here in a deliberately restrained form.The resulting perspective reduces, rather than inflates, ontological commitments whilerestoring conceptual coherence across domains that are otherwise treated in isolation. Withoutspecifying the detailed nature of the generative level, the analysis establishes a unifiedinterpretive framework within which many longstanding foundational problems lose theirforce

Feb 10, 20260 citations