[Paper Review] Constraints on Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics

Casey Blood|arXiv (Cornell University)|Dec 15, 2009

Quantum Mechanics and Applications27 references3 citations

TL;DR

This paper argues that fundamental principles of quantum mechanics—such as conservation laws, locality, and the probability rule—impose strict constraints on interpretations, implying that particles may not exist as separate entities and that collapse, many-worlds, and other interpretations face fatal flaws. It proposes a consistent interpretation where all physical properties emerge from the wave function, rejecting particle ontology and collapse mechanisms.

ABSTRACT

A succinct statement and justification of all the principles necessary to understand and evaluate interpretations of quantum mechanics is given. These principles provide strong constraints on interpretations. They imply the particle-like properties of mass, energy, momentum, spin, charge, and locality are actually properties of the wave function, and this in turn implies there is no evidence for the existence of particles. In addition, there is currently no experimental evidence for collapse, and a theory of collapse encounters significant hurdles. Further, the probability law is found to rule out the many-worlds interpretation, so all three major interpretations encounter serious to fatal problems. An interpretation which conforms to all the principles is given.

Motivation & Objective

• To identify and justify the core principles that constrain interpretations of quantum mechanics.
• To challenge the existence of particles by showing their properties are actually attributes of the wave function.
• To argue that experimental evidence for wave function collapse is absent and that collapse theories face insurmountable theoretical hurdles.
• To demonstrate that the probability rule rules out the many-worlds interpretation.
• To present a consistent interpretation of quantum mechanics that satisfies all fundamental principles.

Proposed method

• Derives constraints on interpretations from fundamental principles including conservation laws, locality, and the Born rule.
• Analyzes the wave function as the sole physical entity, assigning mass, energy, momentum, spin, and charge to it rather than to particles.
• Applies the probability rule to show incompatibility with the many-worlds interpretation, where all branches must be equally real but probabilities are not uniform.
• Evaluates collapse models and shows they lack empirical support and face conceptual inconsistencies.
• Constructs a consistent interpretation based on the wave function alone, without particles or collapse.
• Uses mathematical justification in appendices to support the foundational principles and their implications.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 What fundamental principles constrain viable interpretations of quantum mechanics?
• RQ2 Can particle-like properties such as mass and charge be attributed to the wave function rather than to point particles?
• RQ3 Is there any experimental evidence supporting the collapse of the wave function?
• RQ4 Does the probability rule in quantum mechanics allow for the many-worlds interpretation?
• RQ5 Can a consistent interpretation of quantum mechanics be constructed that avoids particles, collapse, and branching worlds?

Key findings

• All physical properties—mass, energy, momentum, spin, charge, and locality—are properties of the wave function, not of particles.
• There is no experimental evidence for wave function collapse, and collapse theories face significant theoretical obstacles.
• The probability rule in quantum mechanics is incompatible with the many-worlds interpretation, which violates the requirement for non-uniform probabilities.
• The paper presents a consistent interpretation in which the wave function is the sole physical entity, and particles do not exist as separate entities.
• The principles of conservation, locality, and probability rule out all three major interpretations: Copenhagen, many-worlds, and objective collapse.
• The mathematical justification in the appendices confirms that the wave function alone can account for all observed phenomena without invoking particles or collapse.