The Electron Never Collapses: A Geometric Interpretation of Quantum Measurement in ZTD

Yan Zhuang

Published Sep 10, 2026• 0 citations

Abstract

PrefaceThis is not a paper. It contains no rigorous mathematical proof, no complete chain ofderivation, and no peer review endorsement. It is simply a core intuition formed byan independent researcher during the construction of the ZTD theoretical framework,regarding the problem of “electron collapse.”Its purpose is to establish priority of thought, and at the same time to send asignal to potentially interested researchers: here is a path whose conceptual foundationhas been laid, and whose mathematical construction has just begun.The author has already left a large number of articles on Zenodo, attempting to openone black box after another—what is charge, what is mass, what is a field, what is energy,what is the nature of motion—and to provide the clearest physical picture. This articleis one of these thought records.If after reading this you think “this idea is somewhat interesting,” you are welcome tocontact me. If after reading this you think “this idea has problems,” you are even morewelcome to contact me.

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.22694066

Related papers

More on the quantum measurement problem

Gregory N. Derry

Although I have neither an objection to nor an endorsement of David Mermin’s major premise in his Quick Study, “There is no quantum measurement problem” (Physics Today, June 2022, page 62), I would like to make several contextual points.Mermin’s argument has an extensive history, along with a comparable history of rebuttal. Five decades ago Max Jammer wrote that “measurements in quantum mechanics are no more or less problematic than in classical physics, for the Hilbert space vector is only a purely formal device for relating the statistics associated with these arrangements to the physics of observations in classical physics.” That seems like a condensed version of the argument Mermin presents. On the following page, however, Jammer notes that a “problematic aspect whose serious implications were only gradually understood was the fact that as long as a quantum mechanical one-body or many-body system does not interact with macroscopic objects, as long as its motion is described by the deterministic Schrödinger time-dependent equation, no events could be considered to take place in the system.”11. M. Jammer, The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics: The Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics in Historical Perspective, Wiley (1974), pp. 473, 474.Niels Bohr giving a lecture in Copenhagen in April 1929. (Photograph by Samuel Goudsmit, courtesy of the AIP Emilio Segrè Visual Archives, Goudsmit Collection.)PPT|High resolutionRegarding the quotations from Niels Bohr, Mermin’s point is entirely valid and represents Bohr’s position accurately, but Bohr’s thought is always subtle and difficult to capture completely. Another quotation from Bohr, which is consistent with everything else he wrote, is, “The decisive point is that in neither case does the appropriate widening of our conceptual framework imply any appeal to the observing subject, which would hinder unambiguous communication of experience.”22. N. Bohr, Essays 1958–1962 on Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge, Ox Bow Press (1987), p. 7. That quotation seems inconsistent with Mermin’s paragraph that includes the passage “Why should I insist that my interpretation of science, which I use to make sense of the world that I experience, should never make any mention of me?” Bohr always insisted that his framework was a rational “generalization” of classical objectivity.The last and most conceptually important point concerns the ontological status of probability. I don’t necessarily disagree with Mermin and Bruno de Finetti, but it is by no means obvious that they are correct either. David Hawkins, for example, begins 50 pages of rigorous analysis with a brief statement of a major premise.The obvious and natural interpretation of probability in this context is that it introduces, not something that has to do with the nature of the physical system, but something that has to do with the incompleteness of our knowledge….But this opinion turns out to be false. Ignorance of dynamical regularity may be a motive for resorting to probabilities, but it does not explain the probabilities to which we resort.33. D. Hawkins, The Language of Nature: An Essay in the Philosophy of Science, W. H. Freeman (1964), p. 135.Another example can be found in Jammer’s well-known historical account of quantum theory: “For Einstein the notion of probability … was the traditional conception of classical physics, a mathematical objectivization of the human deficiency of complete or exact knowledge but ultimately a creation of the human mind…. For Born probability, as far as it was related to the wave function, was not merely a mathematical fiction but something endowed with physical reality.”44. M. Jammer, The Conceptual Development of Quantum Mechanics, McGraw-Hill (1966), p. 286.Of course, such examples don’t mean that Mermin’s position is incorrect, but I do think that they demand a better argument than a comparison to “Fairies and Witches.” I am confident that Mermin has such an argument, and I look forward to reading it as I continue working toward a coherent position on the unresolved interpretational issues of quantum theory.ReferencesSection:ChooseTop of pageReferences <<CITING ARTICLES1. M. Jammer, The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics: The Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics in Historical Perspective, Wiley (1974), pp. 473, 474. Google Scholar2. N. Bohr, Essays 1958–1962 on Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge, Ox Bow Press (1987), p. 7. Google Scholar3. D. Hawkins, The Language of Nature: An Essay in the Philosophy of Science, W. H. Freeman (1964), p. 135. Google Scholar4. M. Jammer, The Conceptual Development of Quantum Mechanics, McGraw-Hill (1966), p. 286. Google Scholar© 2022 American Institute of Physics.

Physics TodayNov 1, 20222 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 TodayJun 1, 202232 citations

Return to Physical Pictures: An Ontological Interpretation of Fundamental Physical Concepts in ZTD

Yan Zhuang

Mainstream quantum mechanics and quantum field theory have achieved unmatchedmathematical success, yet they leave numerous black boxes in the physicalpicture: what is a field, where does mass come from, why does electric charge havea sign, whether the wave function is a physical reality or a probabilistic tool, whereparticle nature comes from, and why gravity is both so weak and unquantizable.In this paper, within the framework of Marker Ontology (ZTD theory), and basedon the three core concepts of spatial primitives, nearest-neighbor propagation, andsurvivor selection, we provide a unified, natural, and intuitive ontological picturefor matter, energy, mass, momentum, charge, fields, light, gravity, spin, vacuum,quantum fluctuations, antimatter, and other fundamental physical concepts.This paper does not modify any existing mathematical prediction. However,it identifies a decisive experimental direction: the cascade interference experiment.The experiment predicts that in the strong-measurement limit the visibility of thesecond-level interference pattern does not vanish strictly, but retains a small nonzeroresidual. This differs from the predictions of the Copenhagen collapse interpretationand the many-worlds interpretation. It is currently the most important testableconsequence of the ZTD picture.Keywords: Marker Ontology; spatial primitives; constrained refreshment clusters;ontological picture; wave-particle duality; charge origin; mass–energy conversion;gravitational nature; cascade interference experiment

Aug 29, 20260 citations

The ZTD Physical Mapping of the Mathematical Structure of Quantum Mechanics — A Conceptual Framework Paper —

Yan Zhuang

Quantum mechanics has achieved unparalleled mathematical success, but has left a seriesof black boxes at the level of physical pictures: What does it mean that state vectors livein a complex Hilbert space? Why does the imaginary unit i appear? Where does thecommutation relation [ ˆX , ˆp] = iℏ come from? Why does measurement cause collapse? Whydoes the Born rule hold?In this paper, within the framework of ZTD (Marker Ontology), we provide physicalontological interpretations for every mathematical object of quantum mechanics.The positioning of this paper must first be made clear: this is a conceptual frameworkpaper, not a complete mathematical derivation. The goal of this paper is to establisha mapping relationship between the ZTD physical picture and the mathematical structure ofquantum mechanics. For each item in the list, rigorous mathematical argumentation needsto be gradually developed in subsequent work. Among the mathematical derivations givenin this paper, some are already rigorous (such as the discrete derivation of the commutationrelation), some are still conceptual (such as the derivation of the Born rule), and some carrycircularity risks (such as the borrowing of the Fermi golden rule for the Born rule). Theseare honestly marked in the text.The core mappings include:1. Complex Hilbert space corresponds to the complex amplitude space on the primitivenetwork;2. State vectors are the mathematical generalization of diffuse patterns;3. The wave function is the physical distribution of the diffuse pattern on the primitivenetwork;4. The imaginary unit i is the phase encoding of step counting;5. The commutation relation is the continuum limit of the discrete adjacency matrix;6. Unitary evolution is the pattern maintaining itself;7. Measurement is the capture of the diffuse pattern by an atom;8. The Born rule is the statistical result of capture;9. Quantum entanglement is the sharing of the same birth event;10. The uncertainty principle is a necessary consequence of spatial discreteness.This paper does not invent new mathematics, nor does it propose new testable predictions.Its goal is: to turn quantum mechanics from “mathematical mechanics” backinto “physical mechanics.”Keywords: quantum mechanics; mathematical structure; physical mapping; ontology; diffusepattern; unitary evolution; ZTD theory

Sep 17, 20260 citations

Relational Quantum Mechanics and the

Matthew J. Brown

Quantum mechanics describes certain systems as being in superpositions of their properties, yet every measurement on every system that we are able to perform yields a determinate result. The “orthodox” formulation of the theory builds this in by including a postulate that such superpositions “collapse” at the time of measurement. This strategy fails to really explain why such measurements are determinate, is unacceptably imprecise, and makes observation basic in fundamental physical theory, which looks like the wrong sort of process for the job. The problem of the interpretation of quantum mechanics is the problem of finding a more satisfactory understanding of the formalism in This project began in an independent study with Craig Callender, who provided much help in terms of direction, discussion, comments, and continuing support. Thanks also to Jerey Barrett for reading and commenting on an earlier draft of this paper, including helping me find some clearer and more economical way of putting some crucial points.

Jan 1, 20070 citations

Return to Physical Pictures: An Ontological Interpretation of Fundamental Physical Concepts in ZTD(Revised Edition)

Yan Zhuang

(This revised edition removes the cascade interference experiment and adds the delayed-choice, quantum eraser, and filtering picture.) Mainstream quantum mechanics and quantum field theory have achieved unmatchedmathematical success, yet they leave numerous black boxes in the physicalpicture: what a field is, where mass comes from, why electric charge has a sign,whether the wave function is a physical reality or a probabilistic tool, where particlenature comes from, and why gravity is both so weak and unquantizable. Inthis paper, within the framework of Marker Ontology (ZTD theory), and basedon the three core concepts of spatial primitives, nearest-neighbor propagation, andsurvivor selection, we provide a unified, natural, and intuitive ontological picturefor matter, energy, mass, momentum, charge, fields, light, gravity, spin, vacuum,quantum fluctuations, antimatter, and other fundamental physical concepts.This paper does not modify any existing mathematical prediction and does notclaim to provide a new quantitative result. It offers a conceptual framework in whichthe delayed-choice experiment and the quantum eraser are reinterpreted as differentforms of physical filtering, rather than as evidence for retrocausality, consciousnessinducedcollapse, or branching worlds. In particular, it emphasizes that the totaldetection rate is not merely a technical efficiency factor, but is itself part of thefiltering structure that determines which photon histories enter the final statistics.

Aug 30, 20260 citations