Observation, Collapse, and Field-Matter Information Dynamics: An Ontological Reinterpretation of the Quantum Measurement Problem within the Logical Universe Framework
The concepts of “observation” and “collapse” in quantum mechanics have long been treated as either mysterious or merely phenomenological. Within the information‐dynamics framework of the Logical Universe (LU_v3.1), we propose a complete ontological model in which observation is identified as chiral–topological coupling between information solitons; collapse is the topological compression of a superposed field state into a single material path; and decoherence is the release of the material state back into the field, but this return is not reversible—it irreversibly inscribes the entire topological history of the collapse into the global light‐field structure. Matter is thus interpreted as a temporary collapsed snapshot of the field, and the “past” is defined as the irreversible information texture engraved into the topological structure of the field. This model provides a unified ontological foundation for the quantum–classical transition, the measurement problem, and the origin of temporal irreversibility, and yields experimentally testable consequences.
The concepts of “observation” and “collapse” in quantum mechanics have long been treated as either mysterious or merely phenomenological. Within the information‐dynamics framework of the Logical Universe (LU_v3.1), we propose a complete ontological model in which observation is identified as chiral–topological coupling between information solitons; collapse is the topological compression of a superposed field state into a single material path; and decoherence is the release of the material state back into the field, but this return is not reversible—it irreversibly inscribes the entire topological history of the collapse into the global light‐field structure. Matter is thus interpreted as a temporary collapsed snapshot of the field, and the “past” is defined as the irreversible information texture engraved into the topological structure of the field. This model provides a unified ontological foundation for the quantum–classical transition, the measurement problem, and the origin of temporal irreversibility, and yields experimentally testable consequences.
General relativity and quantum mechanics rely on fundamentally incompatible conceptions of spacetime: the former treats spacetime as a smooth, dynamical entity, while the latter presupposes a fixed background on which quantum states evolve. This work introduces the Collapse Spacetime Model (CSM), a foundational framework in which spacetime itself is not fundamental but emerges from discrete ontological transition events (OTEs)—objective, irreversible acts of actualization that generate localized spacetime structure. Within CSM, quantum state reduction is reinterpreted as one particular manifestation of a more general ontological transition, rather than as an anomaly within unitary dynamics. A central refinement, the Multiplicity of Spacetime Hypothesis (MSH), proposes that physical systems construct their own partial spacetimes, with the classical spacetime continuum arising from stable intersections among these locally generated structures. Constants such as the speed of light are interpreted as invariant structural ratios of spacetime co-generation, rather than as fundamental properties of matter or signals. The model aligns conceptually with causal set theory, emergent network geometry, and collapse-based approaches, while offering a unified ontological account of spacetime emergence, time’s passage, and the relational origin of geometry. CSM reframes physical reality as a becoming universe, providing a coherent foundation for quantum gravity, cosmology, and the philosophy of time, while deliberately postponing detailed dynamical and mathematical formalization to future work.
This paper addresses the long-standing observation problem by separating observation from collapse within the Unified Phase Framework (UPF). Observation is defined as reversible phase-slice selection, while collapse is identified with information irreversibility—the loss of recoverability of alternative phase paths beyond a critical threshold. Rather than proposing new physical dynamics or modifying quantum formalism, the work introduces an operational collapse criterion at the informational layer, independent of consciousness, intention, or semantic interpretation. Decoherence is retained as a valid physical mechanism describing how coherence is suppressed, while information irreversibility specifies when such suppression becomes effectively irreversible in practice. Quantum eraser and delayed-choice experiments are reinterpreted as recoverability tests rather than observer-dependent phenomena. To further operationalize this distinction, the paper proposes the Jelly-Slit experiment as a theory-forcing conceptual probe that makes deletion latency and buffer capacity explicit control variables, yielding testable predictions in the form of recoverability thresholds. Finally, the paper introduces a conjugate correspondence between physical interference visibility and phase-locking strength (PLV), framing collapse-like phenomena across quantum, cognitive, and social systems as different phase slices of a shared structural constraint. This work positions collapse as an information-centered, operationally testable phenomenon and provides a unified interpretive framework applicable across physical and informational domains.
The measurement problem of quantum mechanics is predominantly treated in contemporary foundations research as an unresolved problem of dynamics or ontology. Accordingly, dominant solution approaches aim either at additional collapse mechanisms (e.g., GRW-type models), at ontological branching (Many-Worlds interpretations), or at an information-theoretic reinterpretation of state and measurement.The present contribution advances a different thesis. It shows that, despite their methodological differences, these approaches share a common categorical presupposition: they treat the transition from possibility to facticity as an intra-worldly describable occurrence—whether as a dynamical process, an ontological splitting, or a state update. It is precisely this presupposition that is called into question here.Starting from an ontological distinction between possibility and facticity, it is argued that measurement cannot be understood as a temporal event within an already structured world. Rather, it marks a boundary at which temporal, processual, and informational descriptions lose their applicability. The transition to objectivity is therefore not an explainable event, but an irreversible restriction of the space of possibility, through which world becomes factically binding in the first place.Against this background, dynamical collapse models, Many-Worlds interpretations, and information-theoretic ontologies are comparatively analyzed. The aim is not a refutation of these approaches, but a precise boundary determination: it is shown in what way they each provide formally successful answers to partial aspects of the measurement problem, while at the same time presupposing the categorical status of facticization that they claim to explain.The contribution does not understand itself as an alternative interpretation of quantum mechanics, but as an ontological clarification of its domain of validity. It proposes that the measurement problem should no longer be treated as the search for a hidden mechanism, but as an indication of a structural boundary of physical description itself.
Addressing the fundamental metaphysical question of the origin of Being, this paper takes de Broglie’s classical wave mechanics (1924) as its scientific foundation and constructs a self‑consistent interpretive framework of information ontology. It establishes three core axioms: information as the primordial ground, relations prior to entities, and global conservation of information. On this basis, the paper further derives the origin of spatiotemporal dimensions from the laws of information interaction: each basic flip configuration of information corresponds to the generation of a spatial dimension; after three‑dimensional topological closure is completed, the inevitably produced “pending redundant information” that cannot be synchronously and self‑consistently integrated gives rise to the dimension of time within its queuing sequence. Spacetime is therefore not an a priori container but the first compensatory stratum of structure through which information moves toward self‑consistent expression. Subsequently, by means of de Broglie’s phase field, the paper deduces the entire evolutionary chain from pure information distinctions and primordial phase oscillation to the emergence of material hierarchies and quantum‑observation interactions. It argues that quantum measurement and wave‑function collapse are essentially topological remappings and information‑coupling consolidations of heterogeneous phase fields; gravitation and cosmic expansion can be reduced to macroscopic effects of phase gradients. Throughout the text, physical references are strictly limited to de Broglie’s classical wave mechanics, without introducing non‑standard physical models. This study supplements fundamental physical philosophy with a relational‑ontology approach and provides a unified information‑theoretic metaphysical interpretation for foundational problems such as wave–particle duality, the origin of spacetime, and the nature of gravity.
This paper provides a conservative reinterpretation of wavefunction collapse within the Scalar Temporal Field Ontology (STFO), in which time is represented as a strictly monotonic scalar field τ(x). Measurement is treated as an environmentally-induced process of temporal stabilization of macroscopic record sectors along τ. It is shown that collapse does not correspond to a dynamical discontinuity, observer-dependent postulate, or modification of unitary quantum evolution. Instead, collapse is identified with the irreversible loss of τ-coherence between record sectors due to environmental coupling, resulting in restriction of future inference to a single τ-stable sector. Non-realized branches are not eliminated but become temporally disconnected from the observer’s future trajectory along τ. The account is fully compatible with standard decoherence theory and environment-induced superselection (einselection), while supplying a physical temporal arrow governing irreversibility. The paper preserves the empirical content of quantum mechanics and reframes collapse as a temporal phenomenon rather than a fundamental dynamical process.
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.