A. Neumaier's interpretation of quantum mechanics.

ImaLooser
Messages
486
Reaction score
4
I'd like to find out more about A. Neumaier's interpretation of quantum mechanics.

How?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ImaLooser said:
I'd like to find out more about A. Neumaier's interpretation of quantum mechanics.

How?

In my view, particle nonlocality is explained by negating particles any ontological existence. Existent are quantum fields, and on the quantum field level, everything is local. Nonlocal features appear only when one is imposing on the fields a particle interpretation, which, while valid under the usual assumptions of geometric optics, fails drastically art higher resolution. Thus nothing needs to be explained in the region of failure. Just as the local Maxwell equations for a classical electromagnetic field explain single photon nonlocality (double slit experiments), and the stochastic Maxwell equations explain everything about single photons (see http://arnold-neumaier.at/ms/optslides.pdf), so local QFT explains general particle nonlocality.

My thermal interpretation of quantum mechanics (see the section http://arnold-neumaier.at/physfaq/topics/found0.html from my theoretical physics FAQ at http://arnold-neumaier.at/physfaq/physics-faq.html, and Chapter 10 of my book http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/0810.1019) gives a view of physics consistent with actual experimental practice and without any of the strangeness introduced by the usual interpretations. I believe this interpretation to be satisfactory in all respects, though it requires more time and effort (than I have at present) to analyse the standard conundrums along these lines, with a clear statistical mechanics derivation to support my so far mainly qualitative arguments.

See also the PhysicsForums thread
''What does the probabilistic interpretation of QM claim?''
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=480072
 
Thank you very much. It is more than I expected. I've downloaded the materials. I feel that there is some hope I can get the idea, given sufficient effort.
 
I would like to know the validity of the following criticism of one of Zeilinger's latest papers https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2507.07756 "violation of bell inequality with unentangled photons" The review is by Francis Villatoro, in Spanish, https://francis.naukas.com/2025/07/26/sin-entrelazamiento-no-se-pueden-incumplir-las-desigualdades-de-bell/ I will translate and summarize the criticism as follows: -It is true that a Bell inequality is violated, but not a CHSH inequality. The...
I understand that the world of interpretations of quantum mechanics is very complex, as experimental data hasn't completely falsified the main deterministic interpretations (such as Everett), vs non-deterministc ones, however, I read in online sources that Objective Collapse theories are being increasingly challenged. Does this mean that deterministic interpretations are more likely to be true? I always understood that the "collapse" or "measurement problem" was how we phrased the fact that...
This is not, strictly speaking, a discussion of interpretations per se. We often see discussions based on QM as it was understood during the early days and the famous Einstein-Bohr debates. The problem with this is that things in QM have advanced tremendously since then, and the 'weirdness' that puzzles those attempting to understand QM has changed. I recently came across a synopsis of these advances, allowing those interested in interpretational issues to understand the modern view...
Back
Top