The foundation of quantum mechanics in the early twentieth century marked a paradigm shift in our understanding of nature. In the historical trajectory, Erwin Schrödinger introduced the wave equation to describe micro-particles, but Max Born's subsequent probabilistic interpretation—defining the squared modulus of the wavefunction as a probability density—became the cornerstone of the Copenhagen interpretation, embedding intrinsic randomness into physical ontology. This paper investigates a counterfactual historical proposition: What if Schrödinger had firmly rejected the probabilistic interpretation at the outset and instead proposed that "the wavefunction is not a probability distribution, but the minimal mathematical encoding of physical reality"? We construct the ontological and mathematical-philosophical framework of "Compressed Reality Theory" (CRT), tracing how this alternative historical path would have accelerated the early development of quantum information, holographic principles, and quantum gravity. Under this paradigm, the central inquiry of physics shifts from "Where is the particle?" to "How much information is required to fully describe a reality?" By resolving the measurement paradox as a deterministic decompression mechanism rather than a subjective collapse, this thought experiment demonstrates how an information-centric ontology provides a unified, continuous, and deterministic picture bridging quantum phenomena and spacetime geometry.
The foundation of quantum mechanics in the early twentieth century marked a paradigm shift in our understanding of nature. In the historical trajectory, Erwin Schrödinger introduced the wave equation to describe micro-particles, but Max Born's subsequent probabilistic interpretation—defining the squared modulus of the wavefunction as a probability density—became the cornerstone of the Copenhagen interpretation, embedding intrinsic randomness into physical ontology. This paper investigates a counterfactual historical proposition: What if Schrödinger had firmly rejected the probabilistic interpretation at the outset and instead proposed that "the wavefunction is not a probability distribution, but the minimal mathematical encoding of physical reality"? We construct the ontological and mathematical-philosophical framework of "Compressed Reality Theory" (CRT), tracing how this alternative historical path would have accelerated the early development of quantum information, holographic principles, and quantum gravity. Under this paradigm, the central inquiry of physics shifts from "Where is the particle?" to "How much information is required to fully describe a reality?" By resolving the measurement paradox as a deterministic decompression mechanism rather than a subjective collapse, this thought experiment demonstrates how an information-centric ontology provides a unified, continuous, and deterministic picture bridging quantum phenomena and spacetime geometry.
In the late 1920s, Niels Bohr’s "Principle of Complementarity" became a cornerstone of the Copenhagen interpretation, asserting that the wave and particle aspects of micro-entities are mutually exclusive yet complementary properties manifested under distinct experimental arrangements. However, this classical-bound formulation inadvertently entangled quantum physics in a century-long ontological debate over what a microscopic system "really is." This paper presents a counterfactual historical and philosophical critique: had Bohr bypassed the binary framing of wave-particle duality and instead posited the Law of Coexisting Mutually Exclusive Descriptions—which dictates that a single physical system fundamentally possesses multiple, irreducible, and mutually exclusive descriptions simultaneously—the foundational paradigm of quantum mechanics would have undergone a decisive transformation. Under this proposed paradigm, the focus of quantum physics shifts from seeking a singular underlying "substance" to mapping how non-commutative, coexisting descriptions collectively construct physical reality. We demonstrate how this law redefines the quantum measurement problem, dissolves the misconception of "uncertainty" as an inherent ontological vagueness, and provides a unified conceptual framework for quantum entanglement and emergent spacetime in modern field theory. Ultimately, this work establishes a non-reductionist "Multitudinous Description Realism" that offers a clearer conceptual tool for contemporary quantum foundations and quantum information science.
This paper explores a thought experiment: what would physics look like if quantum mechanics had not originated in the early 20th century from the exploration of the physical properties of microscopic particles (such as blackbody radiation and the particle and wave nature of electron orbits), but had instead been established first as a dynamics and probability theory about "physical measurement" itself? Through extrapolation from this historical turning point, this paper reconstructs a theoretical framework centered on "measurement dynamics," not on "particles," "wave functions," or "quantum fields" as fundamental ontology, but on a trinity of "system-measuring instrument-observer." Research shows that under this paradigm, the "measurement problem" is no longer a philosophical dilemma added after the theory's establishment, but rather the logical starting point for its construction; wave functions and quantum fields are relegated to derivative mathematical tools for calculating measurement probability distributions. This paper elaborates on the dynamics of measurement operators, the law of information evolution, and a systematic critique of counterfactual definiteness under this paradigm, providing a new and unified perspective for re-examining the fundamental interpretation of modern quantum mechanics.
This work proposes a minimal ontological framework aimed at systematically resolving key conceptual paradoxes of contemporary physics. The central claim is that many foundational difficulties of twentieth- and twenty-first-century physics arise not from empirical anomalies or mathematical inconsistencies, but from a conflation of mathematical formalism with ontological interpretation. On the basis of a small set of minimal ontological axioms, the work addresses and resolves ten fundamental paradoxes, including wave–particle duality, the measurement problem and collapse, the arrow of time, irreversibility, quantization, the nature of gravity, cosmological origin, the finiteness of the Universe, the status of singularities, and the information paradox. The proposed framework introduces no new physical entities and does not modify existing physical equations. Instead, it imposes strict ontological constraints from which these phenomena follow as necessary consequences. The work does not present an alternative physical theory, but rather an ontological foundation explaining why modern physical theories are successful and why they encounter inherent explanatory limits.
The Schrödinger equation has been the central mathematical instrument of quantum mechanics for a century. This paper argues that it is not a quantum mechanical equation at all. It is classical energy conservation applied inside a sphere, with a classical wave form assumed rather than derived. The wavefunction ψ is not a physical object but a lossy geometric encoding. The Born rule—the requirement to square ψ to obtain probabilities—is not a law of nature but a decompression artifact produced by discarding the imaginary phase. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle is a measurement limit, not an ontological statement about particles, and its use to derive the Bohr radius is circular. All distances obtained from this framework are ratios pretending to be absolutes in a universe where only ratios persist. Relativistic Orthogonal Selection Theory (ROST) dissolves each of these confusions by returning to the geometric substrate the equation was always implicitly describing.
While instructing an undergraduate physical chemistry course on quantum mechanics, I encountered difficulties in elucidating the concept of the particle-in-a-box thought experiment, initially formulated by Erwin Schrödinger. In particular, the node distribution of the wavefunction. Born's Copenhagen interpretation assigns the modulus of the wavefunction as the probability density distribution of particles. The developers of quantum mechanics, including Schrödinger, de Broglie, and Einstein, have openly expressed reservations about this interpretation. Schrödinger's original conception of the wavefunction is intrinsically linked to the particle's momentum rather than the statistical probabilities of particle locations. Because momentum can be encoded in different forms, it could be useful to create wavefunctions using different encoding equations, which is the major attempt of this manuscript. In addition to quantizing energy levels properly for several example systems, the proposed new equations have yielded a striking and alternative interpretation of Schrödinger's wavefunction that aligns well with classical mechanics. This proposed modification enhanced the simplicity of math and strengthened Schrödinger’s original interpretation. These equations could be baby steps to a brand-new quantum calculation algorithm that is simpler and faster than the established ones.
The standard Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics relies on a set of historically established, ad hoc postulates to describe particle-wave duality, measurement, and non-locality. In this paper, we propose a single foundational axiom that fully reproduces the standard mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics while eliminating the need for supplementary assumptions. From this singular postulate, we rigorously derive the fundamental origin of the wave function and the mathematical generator of the Schrödinger equation. Furthermore, we demonstrate via isomorfism that all seemingly inexplicable quantum phenomena—including wave-function collapse and quantum entanglement—are mathematically and conceptually reducible to the underlying dynamics of the double-slit experiment. By establishing a direct fundamental correlation between the double-slit interference mechanism and the Monty Hall phenomenon, we prove that these effects are distinct manifestations of the exact same principle. We framed the double-slit experiment as an interference of the space of possibilities affected by information and simetrys. Ultimately, by anchoring the existing quantum mathematical framework to this unique axiom, this work provides a coherent, paradox-free ontological foundation that resolves the interpretational crisis of quantum mechanics without altering its empirical predictive power.