Abstract The measurement problem has long been a fundamental challenge in quantum mechanics. The mainstream decoherence theory attributes the transition from quantum superposition to classical determinacy to the entanglement between the system and its environment. However, this theory still leaves several foundational issues unresolved: decoherence can only eliminate observable interference fringes but cannot explain why a single measurement yields only one definite outcome; nor can it fully account for the phenomena observed in recent attosecond tunneling experiments. The author first published the temporal relativity hypothesis on the Zenodo preprint platform on June 20, 2026[4]. This theory proposes that quantum superposition is not an intrinsic property of microscopic particles, but rather an apparent effect arising from the relative relationship between the temporal sampling frequency of the detection system and the evolution frequency of the quantum object. When the detector's temporal resolution frequency far exceeds the characteristic evolution frequency of the microscopic particle, the interference fringes from wavefunction superposition gradually disappear, and continuous classical trajectories become observable. On July 11, 2026, the author systematically proposed the qualitative three-stage criterion of temporal relativity within the original preprint framework (also published on Zenodo[8]): when the sampling frequency , the system exhibits classical determinacy; when , the system resides in a critical transition state; when , the system manifests as a quantum superposition state. The precise threshold corresponding to this ratio requires calibration through subsequent continuous attosecond imaging experiments, establishing a natural collaborative pathway between theory and experiment. The attosecond scanning tunneling experiment published by the University of Regensburg on July 3, 2026[3], is in strong agreement with the independent theoretical predictions and the experimentally designed predictions presented in the above preprint (June 20). Furthermore, after the publication of the author's Zenodo preprint on July 11, 2026[8], it was found that the experimental results from the Weizmann Institute of Science group in early 2026[5] are also highly isomorphic with the three-stage evolution predicted by this hypothesis. This paper is an advanced revision building upon two previous versions published by the author on the Zenodo preprint platform: the initial temporal relativity hypothesis incorporating the concept of "consciousness" was proposed on June 20, 2026[4]; the July 11, 2026 version[8] removed the consciousness concept and established a purely physical "detector temporal resolution frequency" qualitative framework with the explicit three-stage model; this version fully inherits the qualitative three-stage model while adding a complete unified mathematical framework—built upon the three pillars of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation, time-domain sampling boundary conditions, and critical phase criteria—upgrading the theory from a qualitative hypothesis to a complete mathematical system capable of quantitative computation and experimental data fitting.
Abstract The measurement problem has long been a fundamental challenge in quantum mechanics. The mainstream decoherence theory attributes the transition from quantum superposition to classical determinacy to the entanglement between the system and its environment. However, this theory still leaves several foundational issues unresolved: decoherence can only eliminate observable interference fringes but cannot explain why a single measurement yields only one definite outcome; nor can it fully account for the phenomena observed in recent attosecond tunneling experiments. The author first published the temporal relativity hypothesis on the Zenodo preprint platform on June 20, 2026[4]. This theory proposes that quantum superposition is not an intrinsic property of microscopic particles, but rather an apparent effect arising from the relative relationship between the temporal sampling frequency of the detection system and the evolution frequency of the quantum object. When the detector's temporal resolution frequency far exceeds the characteristic evolution frequency of the microscopic particle, the interference fringes from wavefunction superposition gradually disappear, and continuous classical trajectories become observable. On July 11, 2026, the author systematically proposed the qualitative three-stage criterion of temporal relativity within the original preprint framework (also published on Zenodo[8]): when the sampling frequency , the system exhibits classical determinacy; when , the system resides in a critical transition state; when , the system manifests as a quantum superposition state. The precise threshold corresponding to this ratio requires calibration through subsequent continuous attosecond imaging experiments, establishing a natural collaborative pathway between theory and experiment. The attosecond scanning tunneling experiment published by the University of Regensburg on July 3, 2026[3], is in strong agreement with the independent theoretical predictions and the experimentally designed predictions presented in the above preprint (June 20). Furthermore, after the publication of the author's Zenodo preprint on July 11, 2026[8], it was found that the experimental results from the Weizmann Institute of Science group in early 2026[5] are also highly isomorphic with the three-stage evolution predicted by this hypothesis. This paper is an advanced revision building upon two previous versions published by the author on the Zenodo preprint platform: the initial temporal relativity hypothesis incorporating the concept of "consciousness" was proposed on June 20, 2026[4]; the July 11, 2026 version[8] removed the consciousness concept and established a purely physical "detector temporal resolution frequency" qualitative framework with the explicit three-stage model; this version fully inherits the qualitative three-stage model while adding a complete unified mathematical framework—built upon the three pillars of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation, time-domain sampling boundary conditions, and critical phase criteria—upgrading the theory from a qualitative hypothesis to a complete mathematical system capable of quantitative computation and experimental data fitting.
Abstract This article presents a revised and conceptually refined formulation of a previously proposed Temporal Interpretation of quantum measurement, explicitly addressing the physical nature of wavefunction collapse. While the original proposal emphasised relativistic aspects of momentum superpositions, the present work clarifies the interpretation within the standard formalism of quantum mechanics, without introducing new dynamics or experimental predictions. Unitary evolution is read as a process of differentiated phase accumulation between branches of a quantum state. In relativistic contexts, phase differentials can be structurally related to effective proper-time differentials, allowing the introduction of a notion of temporal compatibility that provides a physically grounded account of decoherence. When such differentials exceed a characteristic scale, interference between branches becomes operationally inaccessible, while global unitarity is preserved. The observer is treated as a physical system endowed with an irreversible proper time associated with macroscopic, entropic dynamics. Within this framework, collapse is explained as an emergent physical phenomenon arising from the irreversibility of the observer’s proper time, which prevents the reconstruction of phase coherence after an interaction. Collapse is therefore neither a fundamental dynamical mechanism nor an objective event in space-time, but a necessary consequence of temporal irreversibility in physical observers. This formulation sharpens the distinction between decoherence and collapse, preserves full consistency with the Born rule, and positions the Temporal Interpretation as a competing interpretative framework that provides a concrete physical explanation for the quantum–classical transition, improving and clarifying the original proposal. This version clarifies the operational status of the interaction time, refines Sections 5.3 and 5.4, and standardises references and editorial structure. No changes to the formalism or conclusions.
Abstract: The quantum measurement problem has been the deepest conceptual difficulty since the birth of quantum mechanics. Standard quantum mechanics accepts wavefunction collapse as an independent postulate but never provides a physical explanation. The decoherence approach attributes collapse to the interaction between the system and its environment, but faces two fundamental limitations: the “infinite regress” problem and the “insufficiency of decoherence” problem. Within the framework of the Self-Construction Theory (SCT), this paper provides a complete resolution of the measurement problem. The core thesis is that quantum measurement is not a fundamental process independent of the laws of physical evolution, but rather a local manifestation of constructive renormalization—the scale evolution of the spacetime complex field K from microscopic degrees of freedom to macroscopic effective descriptions. The origins of wavefunction collapse, decoherence, and the Born rule receive a unified first‑principles interpretation in this framework. SCT’s spontaneous decoherence mechanism is the key to the resolution. Constructive renormalization inherently involves information loss—the integrated‑out microscopic degrees of freedom no longer exist in the macroscopic effective description. During a measurement, the measuring apparatus possesses a huge number (∼1023) of microscopic degrees of freedom. When the apparatus interacts with the measured system, constructive renormalization triggers information compression of these degrees of freedom—the apparatus can no longer distinguish which branch of the superposition it is in, and quantum coherence is thus spontaneously lost. No “external environment” is needed—the constructive renormalization dynamics of spacetime itself is the ultimate source of decoherence, thereby completely solving the “infinite regress” problem. Among the probability distribution given by the Born rule, the weights of non‑maximal probability branches are further suppressed by information compression under the huge number of microscopic degrees of freedom, so that macroscopic observers can perceive only a definite outcome in the effective description. The information loss caused by constructive renormalization is ontological—it does not rely on any approximation or truncation, thus fundamentally solving the “insufficiency of decoherence” problem. The Born rule—that measurement outcomes occur with probabilities given by the squared amplitudes—is directly derived from the constructive integral structure in SCT. In the constructive renormalization limit, interference terms between different configurations are naturally suppressed by off‑diagonal phase randomization, and the system automatically switches to a classical probabilistic description. In the diagonal density matrix representation, the squared amplitude is the only natural weight that is simultaneously real and non‑negative. Hence the Born rule is not an additional postulate of quantum mechanics but a necessary and unique manifestation of the relative frequencies of the constructive integral in the constructive renormalization limit. This derivation is rigorous within the mathematical framework of constructive renormalization—it does not rely on any approximations or truncations. SCT’s quantum measurement theory is deeply unified with the black hole information paradox. The “collapse” in quantum measurement and the “information loss” in black hole evaporation are different manifestations of the same core mechanism—the redistribution of information due to constructive renormalization—in two extreme physical situations. In quantum measurement, information is redistributed into the degrees of freedom of the macroscopic apparatus; in black hole evaporation, information is redistributed into the time‑point configurations on the horizon. This unification is the strongest proof of the universality of constructive renormalization as an information‑processing mechanism. Keywords: quantum measurement; spontaneous decoherence; constructive renormalization; Born rule; wavefunction collapse; information redistribution; Self-Construction Theory
This paper is a direct, complete, and self-contained continuation of the Time Field Theory (TFT) framework established in Parts I, II, and III. Based on the fast–slow oscillation decomposition of the time field γ derived in TFT III, we provide a full dynamical explanation for quantum measurement and the so-called wavefunction collapse without introducing nonlocality, hidden variables, superluminal effects, or ad hoc quantum postulates. We show that quantum measurement is fundamentally phase locking between the high-frequency time oscillation of a macroscopic observer and the low-frequency time oscillation of a microscopic particle. Crucially, this mechanism is identified as a natural extension of special relativity to the temporal structure of matter, based on the principle of relative states. Wavefunction collapse is not a mysterious projection, but a dynamical localization effect caused by the extreme frequency mismatch between massive observer systems and light microscopic systems. The mechanism of entanglement is explained as conserved common phase splitting from a single source. Bell experiments are interpreted locally and causally via phase locking and relative states. This work eliminates the measurement problem, explains the origin of quantum randomness, and completes the causal, realistic, local interpretation of quantum mechanics within the unified TFT framework.
Abstract This paper present a unified theoretical framework connecting relativistic time dilation, time–state correlation, and quantum superposition. The physical state of an object is modeled as an objective, continuous time-series function s = f(t). In the unobserved regime, the proper timeline of an object is independent of the observer’s reference frame; during observation, relativistic time dilation induces a corresponding state dilation effect, and the observed value represents the projection of the intrinsic state onto the observer’s timeline. Under elementary observation, classical behavior corresponds to a one-to-one state mapping (1 ≤ n < 2), while quantum behavior arises from a many-to-one relation (n ≥ 2) accompanied by state superposition, probabilistic outcomes, and the loss of temporal order. This paper derive formal superposition-projection formulas for time and state and apply the framework to interpret the double-slit interference experiment. The observed randomness of photon detection originates from unit-time projective sampling rather than fundamental indeterminacy, while the photon maintains a deterministic intrinsic wave function along its proper timeline. This paper predict a stepwise increase in discrete observable states as particle velocity approaches critical relativistic thresholds, supporting a continuous transition from classical to quantum behavior. This framework establishes a consistent bridge between special relativity, classical mechanics, probability theory, and quantum mechanics.
English Abstract Since its inception, quantum mechanics has been troubled by the "measurement problem": why does observation cause the wavefunction to collapse, and what role does consciousness play in this process? Building upon von Neumann's measurement chain theory[1] and integrating the concept of "discrimination mind" (vikalpa) from Eastern philosophy, this paper proposes a testable novel hypothesis—consciousness, through its discriminative function, determines the manifestation of quantum system determinacy via its own temporal resolution. This hypothesis redefines the boundary between classical and quantum mechanics from "object size" to "the relative relationship between the sampling rate of consciousness and the rate of change of the observed object," and provides three progressively layered, mutually complementary, and falsifiable experimental designs. It offers an explanatory framework for the foundational problems of quantum mechanics that possesses both philosophical depth and scientific operability.
The problem of measurement taken at face value shows clearly that there is an inconsistency inside the quantum formalism.The phenomenon of decoherence is often presented as a solution to it.A widely debated question is to decide between two different interpretations.The first one is to consider that the decoherence process has the effect to actually project a superposed state into one of its classically interpretable component, hence doing the same job as the reduction postulate.For the second one, decoherence is only a way to show why no macroscopic superposed state can be observed and so, to explain the classical appearance of the macroscopic world, while the quantum entanglement between the system, the apparatus and the environment never disappears.In this case, explaining why only one single definite outcome is observed remains to do.In this paper, we examine arguments for and against both interpretations and defend a position according to which the outcome that is observed is relative to the observer in close parallel to the Everett interpretation.