The Pondicherry interpretation of quantum mechanics
arXiv:quant-ph/9903051 · doi:10.1119/1.19535
Abstract
This article presents a novel interpretation of quantum mechanics. It extends the meaning of ``measurement'' to include all property-indicating facts. Intrinsically space is undifferentiated: there are no points on which a world of locally instantiated physical properties could be built. Instead, reality is built on facts, in the sense that the properties of things are extrinsic, or supervenient on property-indicating facts. The actual extent to which the world is spatially and temporally differentiated (that is, the extent to which spatiotemporal relations and distinctions are warranted by the facts) is necessarily limited. Notwithstanding that the state vector does nothing but assign probabilities, quantum mechanics affords a complete understanding of the actual world. If there is anything that is incomplete, it is the actual world, but its incompleteness exists only in relation to a conceptual framework that is more detailed than the actual world. Two deep-seated misconceptions are responsible for the interpretational difficulties associated with quantum mechanics: the notion that the spatial and temporal aspects of the world are adequately represented by sets with the cardinality of the real numbers, and the notion of an instantaneous state that evolves in time. The latter is an unwarranted (in fact, incoherent) projection of our apparent ``motion in time'' into the world of physics. Equally unwarranted, at bottom, is the use of causal concepts. There nevertheless exists a ``classical'' domain in which language suggestive of nomological necessity may be used. Quantum mechanics not only is strictly consistent with the existence of this domain but also presupposes it in several ways.
TeX, 38 pages, forthcoming in American Journal of Physics under the title ``What quantum mechanics is trying to tell us'', v2: revised submission, v3: changes in proof
References in corpus (3)
Cited by in corpus (29)
- Why Should we Interpret Quantum Mechanics?
- Objective probabilities, quantum counterfactuals, and the ABL rule
- The world according to quantum mechanics (or, the 18 errors of Henry P. Stapp)
- Making sense of a world of clicks
- The Pondicherry interpretation of quantum mechanics: An overview
- Why the laws of physics are just so
- This elusive objective existence
- On the EPR-type Entanglement in the Experiments of Scully et Al. I. The Micromaser Case and Delayed-choice Quantum Erasure
- Quantum Mechanics and the Cookie Cutter Paradigm
- Do quantum states evolve? Apropos of Marchildon's remarks
- Is the end in sight for theoretical pseudophysics?
- Remarks on Mohrhoff's Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics
- Reflections on the Spatiotemporal Aspects of the Quantum World
- The mathematical role of time and space-time in classical physics
- Two theories of decoherence
- The Counterfactual Meaning of the ABL Rule
- Objective probability and quantum fuzziness
- Quantum mechanics and consciousness: fact and fiction
- The Nature of the Controversy over Time-Symmetric Quantum Counterfactuals
- Bohr, QBism, and Beyond
- Unveiled reality: comment on d'Espagnat's note on measurement
- The Utility of Time-Symmetric Quantum Counterfactuals: A Response to Kastner
- The One, the Many, and the Quantum
- Time is dispensable in thermodynamics
- A QBist Ontology
- Quantum mechanics and elements of reality
- Why physical understanding should precede the mathematical formalism - conditional quantum probabilities as a case-study
- Defending the Pondicherry interpretation: A response to Shafiee, Jafar-Aghdami, and Golshani
- Cosmological constant and spontaneous gauge symmetry breaking: the particle physics and cosmology interface charade