https://arxiv.org/api//Oj5kZRcobzJm5ajfN8dDmrt0PU 2026-06-13T23:26:05Z 5610 225 15 http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.21858v1 2025-12-26T04:48:47Z

In 1954, following a five-year research period in the U.S., Professor Hideki Yukawa returned to Japan and visited Kochi on March 21 to attend the unveiling ceremony for the first statue of him ever built in Japan, a project initiated by the PTA of Yasu Elementary School in Yasu Town, Kochi Prefecture. By a coincidence of history, just three weeks prior on March 1, the U.S. had conducted a hydrogen bomb test at Bikini Atoll in the Pacific Ocean. Many Japanese fishing boats were operating there at the time and had not been informed in advance. As a result, numerous boats, including the Daigo Fukuryu Maru, were exposed to radiation. Upon his arrival at Kochi Station on the evening of March 21, Yukawa was relentlessly questioned by reporters about the Bikini hydrogen bomb. This was a source of deep anguish for Yukawa, a Japanese physicist who had won the Nobel Prize for his work on "atomic physics." He firmly refused to answer, stating that the topic was "outside the scope of my research." The next evening, at a public lecture in Kochi City on March 22, he again refused to speak about the Bikini hydrogen bomb or nuclear power, stating that he was an amateur in nuclear research and that there were many other experts. However, just four days later, on March 28, after returning to Kyoto, Yukawa drafted his famous essay, "The Turning Point for Humanity and Atomic Power," which was published in a newspaper on March 30. From that point on, he was drawn into the tumultuous issue of the Bikini hydrogen bomb and nuclear power. When did a tormented Yukawa make his decision? This article meticulously reveals, based on historical documents, what led the anguished Yukawa to make such a rapid decision within a single day and what caused the immense change in his mindset overnight.

2025-12-26T04:48:47Z 64 pages, in Japanese language Soryushiron Kenkyu (Kyoto) 2025 Shigeo Ohkubo http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.20416v1 2025-12-23T15:00:11Z

For most of its history, cosmology was a qualitatively constrained discourse on the universe, shaped by limited observational access and the absence of global dynamical laws. This situation has changed decisively in recent decades. Modern cosmology is now driven by an unprecedented flow of high-precision data from a wide range of independent probes, including the cosmic microwave background, large-scale structure, supernovae, baryon acoustic oscillations, gravitational lensing, cosmic chronometers, redshift-space distortions, gravitational-wave standard sirens, and emerging 21-cm observations, among others. This observational wealth is matched by a concrete theoretical and mathematical framework, based on general relativity, which provides the dynamical equations governing the evolution of spacetime and matter at cosmic scales. Combined with explicit background and perturbative equations, this framework enables quantitative, predictive, and falsifiable descriptions of cosmic evolution. Thus, cosmology operates today as a nomological natural science of the observable universe, characterized by general laws, predictive power, and systematic empirical testing. We argue that this epistemic transformation motivates a corresponding conceptual shift, directly analogous to the historical transition from astrology to astronomy. In this sense, the transition from cosmology to \emph{cosmonomy} should begin to be discussed among cosmologists, or, more precisely, among cosmonomers.

2025-12-23T15:00:11Z Conceptual and epistemological analysis of modern precision cosmology as a data-driven, law-based science (termed "cosmonomy''), addressed to the cosmology community and historians/philosophers of science Emmanuel N. Saridakis http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.19956v1 2025-12-23T01:04:50Z

The Nobel Prize in Physics 2025 has been awarded to John Clarke, John Martinis, and Michel Devoret for "the discovery of macroscopic quantum mechanical tunnelling and energy quantisation in an electric circuit". Their achievements open up possibilities for developing the next generation of quantum technologies, including quantum cryptography, quantum computers, and quantum sensors. This article explains physical grounds of these discoveries and describes the role of earlier studies of weak superconductivity and macroscopic quantum systems by other scientists, highlighting the contribution of researchers from the B.I. Verkin Institute for Low Temperature Physics and Engineering of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, who obtained pioneering results in this field. The paper includes short biographies of the Nobel laureates.

2025-12-23T01:04:50Z 10 pages, 4 photos, English translation of the paper published in Ukrainian in Visnyk of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, see https://nasu-periodicals.org.ua/index.php/visnyk/article/view/25424/21677 Visn. Nac. Akad. Nauk Ukr. 2025(12) 20-30 O. G. Turutanov 10.15407/visn2025.12.020 http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.19790v1 2025-12-22T19:00:01Z

We find a necessary condition for subsystems to become entangled after a quantum reference frame transformation. By distinguishing between quantum systems suitable to act as reference frames and physical systems described relative to these frames, we define passive quantum reference frames and show that transformations between these cannot produce entanglement between physical systems. Our results also apply to the study of entanglement between subsystems in the perspectival framework even when there is no distinction between physical and reference systems.

2025-12-22T19:00:01Z 5 pages + appendices T. Rick Perche Natália Salomé Móller Guilherme Franzmann http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.17024v2 2025-12-22T06:31:55Z

Recent proposals suggest that detecting entanglement between two spatially superposed masses would establish the quantum nature of gravity. However, these gravitationally induced entanglement (GIE) experiments rely on assumptions about subsystem independence. We sharpen the theoretical underpinnings of such proposals by examining them through the lens of algebraic quantum field theory (AQFT), distinguishing distinct operational and algebraic notions of independence. We argue that state and measurement independence of subsystems, essential to the experimental logic, is nontrivial in the presence of gauge constraints and gravitational dressing. Using gravitationally dressed fields, we recall that commutation relations between spacelike separated observables are nontrivial, undermining strict Hilbert space factorization. We further explore the implications for entanglement witnesses, investigating the Tsirelson bound when subsystem algebras fail to commute, and showing that the Tsirelson bound persists for a suitably symmetrized CHSH observable even though the operational status of such "joint" observables becomes delicate when commensurability fails. Our analysis highlights how even within linearized covariant quantum gravity, violations of microcausality may affect both the interpretation, modelling, and design of proposed laboratory tests of quantum gravity, despite remaining negligible for current experimental regimes. Although we consider GIE-style protocols as a concrete case study, the subsystem-independence issues we highlight are generic to low-energy (perturbative) quantum gravity. Finally, we derive estimates for dressing-induced microcausality violations, which suggest a complementary avenue to current proposals: in principle, bounding dressing-induced microcausality violations themselves as a probe of the quantum nature of gravity.

2025-12-18T19:39:19Z Minor revisions and references added. Comments are very welcome! Nicolas Boulle Guilherme Franzmann http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.18603v1 2025-12-21T05:27:22Z

Locally covariant algebraic quantum field theory (LCQFT) satisfies Einstein causality through microcausality and operational no-signalling, yet Bell-type correlations persist in entangled field states across spacelike regions. We demonstrate that this apparent tension reflects a fundamental covariance obstruction: no assignment of classical past variables can simultaneously be covariant under spacetime embeddings, screen off quantum correlations, and reproduce AQFT statistics. This obstruction is distinct from dynamical nonlocality or signalling violations. We formalize this as a no-go theorem in the category-theoretic framework of LCQFT, showing that Bell's notion of local causality -- requiring factorization conditioned on a common past -- is structurally incompatible with diffeomorphism covariance. The failure of Bell locality thus reflects not a breakdown of relativistic causality but the impossibility of embedding quantum correlations into a classical causal framework without introducing preferred foliations or non-covariant beables. This clarifies the conceptual status of nonlocality in relativistic quantum theory.

2025-12-21T05:27:22Z 13 Pages, 2 Figures Joseph Samper Finberg http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.18257v1 2025-12-20T07:47:53Z

Standard formulations of supervenience typically treat higher level properties as point valued facts strictly fixed by underlying base states. However, in many scientific domains, from statistical mechanics to machine learning, basal structures more naturally determine families of probability measures than single outcomes. This paper develops a general framework for stochastic supervenience, in which the dependence of higher level structures on a physical base is represented by Markov kernels that map base states to distributions over macro level configurations. I formulate axioms that secure law like fixation, nondegeneracy, and directional asymmetry, and show that classical deterministic supervenience appears as a limiting Dirac case within the resulting topological space of dependence relations. To connect these metaphysical claims with empirical practice, the framework incorporates information theoretic diagnostics, including normalized mutual information, divergence based spectra, and measures of tail sensitivity. These indices are used to distinguish genuine structural stochasticity from merely epistemic uncertainty, to articulate degrees of distributional multiple realization, and to identify macro level organizations that are salient for intervention. The overall project offers a conservative extension of physicalist dependence that accommodates pervasive structured uncertainty in the special sciences without abandoning the priority of the base level.

2025-12-20T07:47:53Z Youheng Zhang 10.1007/s13194-026-00739-8 http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.18105v1 2025-12-19T22:22:12Z

We reformulate the CHSH game in terms of indivisible stochastic processes. Using Barandes's stochastic-quantum correspondence and its associated definition of causal locality, we present a novel proof of the Tsirelson bound. In particular, we show that unlike the no-signaling principle alone, the postulates defining causally local, indivisible stochastic processes are precisely strong enough to allow for violations of the Bell inequality up to, but not beyond, the Tsirelson bound.

2025-12-19T22:22:12Z 13 pages, 2 figures Jacob A. Barandes Mahmudul Hasan David Kagan http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.18040v1 2025-12-19T20:14:26Z

Why do physicists almost universally take the direction of positive rotation to be counterclockwise, and three-dimensional coordinates to be right-handed? This paper traces the historical development of these chiral conventions, with an emphasis on the physical quantity whose direction became the focal point of this discussion in the mid-1800s, the magnetic field. Though these standards are often reduced to mere mathematical, inconsequential choices, an analysis of the impact of Newton, Maxwell, the London Mathematical Society, and others toward the subject can enhance classroom discussion, not only as a contextual sidebar, but also by emphasizing the influence conventions in physics can have on pedagogy, communication, and scientific advancement.

2025-12-19T20:14:26Z 18 pages, 4 figures, 1 appendix Am. J. Phys. 94, 191-196 (2026) Tyler McMaken 10.1119/5.0220969 http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.18002v1 2025-12-19T19:01:47Z

For a century, quantum theory has posed a fundamental challenge to philosophical thinking. On its face, it repudiates many of the key features of the mechanical conception of physical reality. However, the challenge of developing a precise, coherent alternative to that conception has yet to be met. Here, I argue that a major hindrance to the project of quantum interpretation is its existing interpretative methodologies, which suffer from a lack of systematicity in their judgements about what aspects of the theory are interpretational relevant. In particular, I argue that current interpretations tend to marginalize the informal part of the theory in favour of its formal part, and place inappropriate emphasis on the natural language component of the formalism over its detailed mathematical structure. To counterbalance these biases, I propose that an interpretation-free zone be constructed around the theory, wherein an interpreter initially adopt a descriptive stance which considers all parts of the theory, and that the results of this deliberation~(and the judgements about what facts are interpretationally relevant) are reported as part of their interpretation. I argue that the interpretation of quantum theory poses special challenges and difficulties which necessitate this interpretation-free zone, and that existing interpretative methodologies are insufficient to address them. Further, I argue that a reconstructive interpretative methodology, which harnesses the recent results of the quantum reconstruction program, provides a powerful means to identify almost all facts that could be interpretationally relevant, and naturally meets these challenges and difficulties. Moreover, I argue that the quantum reconstruction program offers a powerful way to discover new physical principles, and offers a systematic pathway to build a rich, coherent conception of quantum reality.

2025-12-19T19:01:47Z Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 115 (2026) 102100 Philip Goyal 10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.102100 http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.06375v4 2025-12-19T09:20:18Z

The quantum mechanics postulate called the Born Rule attributes a probabilistic meaning to a wave function. This paper derives the Born Rule from other quantum principles along with a model of the measurement process. The nondeterministic nature of quantum measurements is hypothesized to arise from an ignorance of the quantum states of a measuring device's microscopic components. Their interactions with a system to be measured are modeled heuristically with any member of a particular class of stochastic processes, each of which generate the Born Rule. One member of the class appears particularly compatible with properties expected of quantum interactions.

2024-08-08T12:10:26Z The previous version of the paper portrayed its failure to identify a specific quantum mechanism with any of the stochastic models as a deficiency of the approach. The revision realizes that this is instead a positive feature, in that the models' lack of specificity to any particular physical measurement mechanism is a property shared with the Born Rule itself. Second revision had typo page 1 Alan Schaum http://arxiv.org/abs/2011.12716v5 2025-12-19T08:02:25Z

The Frauchiger-Renner argument aims to show that `quantum theory cannot consistently describe the use of itself': in many-party settings where agents are themselves subject to quantum experiments, agents may make predictions that contradict observations. Here, we introduce a simplified setting using only three agents, that is independent of the initial quantum state, thus eliminating in particular any need for entanglement, and furthermore does not need to invoke any final measurement and resulting collapse. Nevertheless, the predictions and observations made by the agents cannot be integrated into a single, consistent account. We propose that the existence of this sort of \emph{Rashomon effect}, i.e. the impossibility of uniting different perspectives, is due to failing to account for the limits put on the information available about any given system as encapsulated in the notion of an \emph{epistemic horizon}.

2020-11-23T16:49:14Z v5: 36 pages, 8 figures; clarifications, amendments and corrections throughout; main conclusions unchanged. Comments still very welcome! Jochen Szangolies http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.17124v1 2025-12-18T23:31:13Z

Dualities in physics have challenged traditional forms of scientific realism by undermining the idea that theories describe a unique underlying ontology. In this paper, we develop a new perspective on scientific realism that responds to this challenge. We argue that while realist commitment remains appropriate at the level of a theory's full formal structure, ontological commitment should be treated as tied to specific empirical contexts rather than to a fixed, real ontology. Our proposal draws inspiration from Dennett's notion of a "compression algorithm" as a defining criterion of a scientific theory. On this basis, we separate realism from ontological commitment. To clarify the stakes of this distinction, we contrast our approach with common core realism, which locates ontology in the invariant structure shared by dual models. Focusing on dualities in quantum mechanics and string theory, we show how our view accommodates ontological pluralism while preserving a robust form of structural realism.

2025-12-18T23:31:13Z Comments and suggestions are very welcome! Richard Dawid Guilherme Franzmann http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.17050v1 2025-12-18T20:37:47Z

The Nobel Prize in Physics 2025 has been awarded to John Clarke, John Martinis, and Michel Devoret for "the discovery of macroscopic quantum mechanical tunnelling and energy quantisation in an electric circuit". The paper explains the essence of their studies and shows in a historical context the importance of earlier research in superconductivity and quantum physics of macroscopic systems by other physicists, particularly, Ukrainian scientists, including employees of the B. Verkin Institute for Low Temperature Physics and Engineering of the NAS of Ukraine (ILTPE). The role of the Fizyka Nyzkykh Temperatur (FNT) journal issued by ILTPE in Kharkiv and its translation as AIP Low Temperature Physics (LTP) in dissemination of results of the theoretical and experimental studies in the field is emphasized as well.

2025-12-18T20:37:47Z 3 pages, 1 figure, accepted manuscript before minor correction (see the published paper) Low Temp. Phys. 51, 1522-1524 (2025) O. G. Turutanov 10.1063/10.0039961 http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.23721v1 2025-12-18T10:04:14Z

We read Karen Crowther's \emph{Another 100 Years of Quantum Interpretation?} with two practical goals. First, we spell out what she means by interpretation'': an attempt to provide understanding (not just predictions), which may be representationalist or non-representationalist, and which she contrasts with deeper \emph{reductive} (inter-theoretic) explanation -- especially in the quantum-gravity setting. Second, we list twelve points where the paper's physics-facing wording could be sharpened. In our view, several claims are directionally well-motivated but stated more strongly than the underlying physics supports, or they run together distinct notions (e.g.\ degrees of freedom,'' singularity,'' and different senses of locality'') that need careful separation. We end by suggesting that the philosophical question is genuinely worthwhile, but the physics should be phrased more cautiously so that heuristic motivation is not mistaken for strict implication.

2025-12-18T10:04:14Z 13 pages, many references, notes on arXiv:2512.14315 Mikołaj Sienicki Krzysztof Sienicki