Abstract: At the heart of quantum science lies one of nature's most enduring mysteries: entanglement. This paper proposes an alternative explanatory framework that introduces no new particles, hidden variables, fields, or modifications to quantum mechanics. Instead, it argues that the non-separable joint state already present in the formalism should be regarded as the common quantum object with respect to which local measurements are defined. Reexamining Bell's theorem from this perspective, the paper asks whether the mathematical object under analysis changes when the discussion shifts from the joint entangled state to local response functions. The work preserves all standard predictions of quantum mechanics while offering a different conceptual interpretation of quantum correlations.
Abstract: At the heart of quantum science lies one of nature's most enduring mysteries: entanglement. This paper proposes an alternative explanatory framework that introduces no new particles, hidden variables, fields, or modifications to quantum mechanics. Instead, it argues that the non-separable joint state already present in the formalism should be regarded as the common quantum object with respect to which local measurements are defined. Reexamining Bell's theorem from this perspective, the paper asks whether the mathematical object under analysis changes when the discussion shifts from the joint entangled state to local response functions. The work preserves all standard predictions of quantum mechanics while offering a different conceptual interpretation of quantum correlations.
Abstract This work presents an interpretation of the phenomenon of quantum entanglement within the framework of the Topological Model of Physics (MTF). It is proposed that correlations between particles can be described in terms of a shared global phase or structure, defined at the common origin of the particles in the system. This phase does not determine pre-existing values of observables, but rather acts as a common geometric or topological constraint that is preserved during separation, whose projection in each measurement depends on the experimental context. In this approach, such a phase does not require dynamical evolution during the separation of the particles, and therefore the observed correlations need not be interpreted in terms of action at a distance at the moment of measurement. This proposal is related to the original formulation of the EPR paradox, as well as to the restrictions imposed by Bell’s inequalities and their experimental verifications, particularly in the works of Alain Aspect and CHSH. In this framework, the notion of “spooky action at a distance” is considered unnecessary as an explanatory element, since correlations are interpreted as the manifestation of a structure shared from the origin. A form of state or structural realism is preserved, but not a classical realism of pre-existing values; furthermore, there is no signal transmission and the limit imposed by the speed of light is respected. In standard quantum theory, when a property of an entangled particle is measured, the collapse of the wave function common to both particles occurs. Therefore, the value of the property measured in one of them determines the value of that same property in the other. The theory is fully verified experimentally, but it does not explicitly state the physical mechanism underlying this result. The aim of this presentation is to offer a physical interpretation of an underlying mechanism.
Quantum mechanics is an immensely successful theory, occupying a unique position in the history of science. It has solved mysteries ranging from macroscopic superconductivity to the microscopic theory of elementary particles and has provided deep insights into the nature of vacuum on the one hand and the description of the nucleon on the other. Whole new fields such as quantum optics and quantum electronics owe their very existence to this body of knowledge. However, despite the stunning successes of quantum mechanics, there is no general agreement on the conceptual foundations and interpretation of the subject. The theory provides unambiguous information about the outcome of a measurement of a physical object. However, many feel that it does not provide a satisfactory answer to the nature of the “reality” we should attribute to the physical objects between the acts of measurement. The conceptual difficulty comes about because the wave function |ψ〉 is usually given by a coherent superposition of various distinguishable experimental outcomes. If we denote the collection of states that represent the possible outcomes of an experiment by |ψ j 〉, then |ψ〉 = ∑ j c j |ψ j 〉 where c j = 〈ψ j |ψ〉. The probability of the outcome |ψ j 〉 is P j =|c j | 2 . In the process of measurement, the so called collapse of the wave function takes place and a single, definite state |ψ i 〉 of the physical object is chosen. The difficulty comes about in the interpretation of the mechanism by which this definite state is chosen from amongst all the possible outcomes.
This manuscript revisits quantum entanglement from a quantum field–theoretic perspective,with the aim of clarifying its conceptual status rather than proposing a new theory. The central claim is that quantum entanglement need not be understood as a mysteriousnonlocal phenomenon.When quantum fields are taken as the primary physical entities, entanglement followsnaturally from the non-separable structure of global field excitations.What appears puzzling in particle-based descriptions is thus revealed to be an expectedfeature of field-based ontology combined with reduced descriptions. The paper emphasizes a structural reading of the wavefunction as a description of fieldexcitations, and interprets entanglement as a consequence of restricting access to aglobally defined state.Locality is preserved at the level of operators, and all empirical predictions of quantumfield theory remain unchanged. No new dynamics, interpretations, or empirical claims are introduced.Instead, the work makes explicit a conceptual perspective that is already implicit instandard quantum field theory but is rarely articulated in a unified and accessible form.Formal details supporting the argument are provided in an appendix, while the main textfocuses on conceptual clarity. This work is intended as a contribution to the foundations of quantum theory, clarifyingthe relationship between entanglement, locality, and field-theoretic structure.
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.
Previously suggested hidden time interpretation of quantum mechanics allows to reproduce the same predictions as standard quantum mechanics provides, since it is based on Feynman many - paths formulation of QM. While new experimental consequences of this interpretation are under investigation, some advantages can be enumerated. (1) The interpretation is much field theoretic - like in classical sense, so it is local in mathematical sense, though quantum (physical) non-locality is preserved. (2) The interpretation is based on one type of mathematical objects, rather than two different (Hilbert space vectors and operators). (3) The interpretation, as it was argued, overcomes the problem of hidden variables in a radically new way, with no conflict to Bell's theorem. Recently an important argument against hidden variables - like formulations of quantum theory was risen - "no protocol" argument. It is argued in the paper, that hidden time interpretation successfully overcomes this argument.
Introduction The historical development of scientific progress teaches us that every theory that was established and broadly accepted at a certain time was later inevitably replaced by a deeper and more fundamental theory of which the old one remains a special case. One celebrated example is Newtonian (classical) mechanics, which was superseded by quantum mechanics at the beginning of the last century. It is natural to ask whether in a similar manner there could be logically consistent theories that are more generic than quantum theory itself. It could then turn out that quantum mechanics is an effective description of such a theory, only valid within our current restricted domain of experience. At present, quantum theory has been tested against very specific alternative theories that, both mathematically and in their concepts, are distinctly different. Instances of such alternative theories are non-contextual hidden-variable theories [1], local hidden-variable theories [2], crypto-nonlocal hidden-variable theories [3, 4], or some nonlinear variants of the Schrödinger equation [5–8]. Currently, many groups are working on improving experimental conditions to be able to test alternative theories based on various collapse models [9–14]. The common trait of all these proposals is to suppress one or the other counterintuitive feature of quantum mechanics and thus keep some of the basic notions of a classical worldview intact. Specifically, hidden-variable models would allow us to preassign definite values to outcomes of all measurements; collapse models are mechanisms for restraining superpositions between macroscopically distinct states, and nonlinear extensions of the Schrödinger equation may admit more localized solutions for wave-packet dynamics, thereby resembling localized classical particles.