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

On the Formulation of the Measurement Problem

Glenn Layne Stoner

Published Jul 3, 2026• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

A brief note arguing that the quantum measurement problem, as ordinarily formulated, may be ill-posed. The paper suggests that the Schrödinger equation is being asked to explain the emergence of a definite historical record, although it was constructed to describe the unitary evolution of quantum states.
DOI
10.5281/zenodo.21172897

Related papers

A note on the quantum measurement problem

N. David Mermin

The idea that wave-function collapse is a physical process stems from a misunderstanding of probability and the role it plays in quantum mechanics.

arXiv:2206.10741•Jun 21, 2022•0 citations

Quantum measurement and the mind-brain connection

Henry Pierce Stapp

It is argued that quantum measurements do pose a problem, within the context created by the fundamental aim of science, which is identified as the construction of a cohesive, comprehensive, and rationally coherent idea of the nature of the world in which we live. Models of nature are divided into two classes: (1), those in which there is a selection process that, for any possible measurement, would, if that measurement were to be performed, pick out one single outcome, and, (2), all others. It is proved that any model of class that reproduces the predictions of quantum theory must violate the condition that there be no faster-than-light influences of any kind. This result is used to motivate the study of models in which unitary evolution is maintained and there is no selection of unique outcomes. A consideration of ontic probabilities, historical records, and the form of the mind-brain connection leads to an elaboration of the Everett many-worlds interpretation that appears to provide the basis of satisfactory solution of the measurement problem. 18 refs.

•Oct 17, 1990•10 citations

There is no quantum measurement problem

N. David Mermin

The idea that the collapse of a quantum state is a physical process stems from a misunderstanding of probability and the role it plays in quantum mechanics.

Physics Today•Jun 1, 2022•32 citations

Quantum Propensities and the Mind-Brain Connection

Henry Pierce Stapp

It is argued that quantum measurements do pose a problem, within the context created by the fundamental aim of science, which is identified as the construction of a cohesive, c~mprehensive, and rationally coherent idea of the nature of the world in which we live.Models of nature are divided into t\vo classes: (1 ), those in which there is a selection process that, for any possible measurement, would, if that measurement were to be performed, pick out one single outcome, and, (2), all others.It is proved that any model of class ( 1) that reproduces the predictions of quantum theory must violate the condition that there be no fasterthan-light influences of any kind.This result is used to motivate the study of models in which unitary evolution is maintained and there is no selection of unique outcomes.A consideration of ontic probabilities, historical records, and the form of the mind-brain connection leads to an elaboration of the Everett many-worlds interpretation that appears to provide the basis of satisfactory solution of the measurement problem.

•Aug 1, 1990•1 citation

Five Formulations of the Quantum Measurement Problem in the Frame of the Standard Interpretation

Manuel Bächtold

Journal for General Philosophy of Science•Jul 9, 2008•19 citations

Resolving the Measurement Problem via Observer-Relative Information

Greco, Giuseppe Junior

The quantum measurement problem is traditionally framed as a conflict between unitary dynamics and the emergence of definite outcomes. A wide range of quantum paradoxes—including Schrödinger’s Cat, Wigner’s Friend, Bell nonlocality, delayed-choice experiments, and the Quantum Zeno effect—are commonly interpreted as manifestations of this conflict. This paper argues that these paradoxes share a common origin: the assumption that quantum states represent observer-independent physical reality. Building on an Observer-First Interpretation (OFI), quantum states are instead treated as observer-relative informational constructs constrained by evidence accessibility and record stability. Within this unified framework, definite outcomes, nonlocal correlations, temporal ordering, and measurement-induced stabilization emerge consistently without modifying quantum mechanics or introducing additional dynamics. The quantum measurement problem is thus reformulated as an informational consistency condition rather than a physical inconsistency.

•Dec 15, 2025•0 citations
It is argued that quantum measurements do pose a problem, within the context created by the fundamental aim of science, which is identified as the construction of a cohesive, comprehensive, and rationally coherent idea of the nature of the world in which we live. Models of nature are divided into two classes: (1), those in which there is a selection process that, for any possible measurement, would, if that measurement were to be performed, pick out one single outcome, and, (2), all others. It is proved that any model of class that reproduces the predictions of quantum theory must violate the condition that there be no faster-than-light influences of any kind. This result is used to motivate the study of models in which unitary evolution is maintained and there is no selection of unique outcomes. A consideration of ontic probabilities, historical records, and the form of the mind-brain connection leads to an elaboration of the Everett many-worlds interpretation that appears to provide the basis of satisfactory solution of the measurement problem. 18 refs.
It is argued that quantum measurements do pose a problem, within the context created by the fundamental aim of science, which is identified as the construction of a cohesive, c~mprehensive, and rationally coherent idea of the nature of the world in which we live.Models of nature are divided into t\vo classes: (1 ), those in which there is a selection process that, for any possible measurement, would, if that measurement were to be performed, pick out one single outcome, and, (2), all others.It is proved that any model of class ( 1) that reproduces the predictions of quantum theory must violate the condition that there be no fasterthan-light influences of any kind.This result is used to motivate the study of models in which unitary evolution is maintained and there is no selection of unique outcomes.A consideration of ontic probabilities, historical records, and the form of the mind-brain connection leads to an elaboration of the Everett many-worlds interpretation that appears to provide the basis of satisfactory solution of the measurement problem.
The quantum measurement problem is traditionally framed as a conflict between unitary dynamics and the emergence of definite outcomes. A wide range of quantum paradoxes—including Schrödinger’s Cat, Wigner’s Friend, Bell nonlocality, delayed-choice experiments, and the Quantum Zeno effect—are commonly interpreted as manifestations of this conflict. This paper argues that these paradoxes share a common origin: the assumption that quantum states represent observer-independent physical reality. Building on an Observer-First Interpretation (OFI), quantum states are instead treated as observer-relative informational constructs constrained by evidence accessibility and record stability. Within this unified framework, definite outcomes, nonlocal correlations, temporal ordering, and measurement-induced stabilization emerge consistently without modifying quantum mechanics or introducing additional dynamics. The quantum measurement problem is thus reformulated as an informational consistency condition rather than a physical inconsistency.