https://arxiv.org/api/7cTMbHuMCY6Plo/ckLCfTog4KdA 2026-06-14T07:37:00Z 5610 345 15 http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.14262v1 2025-09-13T16:25:25Z

Quantum technologies promise transformative advancements but pose significant dual-use risks. Realizing their potential while mitigating risks necessitates a robust, anticipatory, and harmonized EU regulatory framework, grounded in the precautionary principle. Such a framework must be sui generis, as foundational quantum mechanical phenomena -incl. superposition, entanglement, and tunneling -defy the intuitive classical assumptions of factual certainty, causality, and locality that underpin existing legal paradigms, demanding a bespoke regulatory architecture that contributes to the emerging lex specialis for quantum information technologies. Responding to the Quantum Europe Strategy, this contribution outlines the rationale for a dedicated European Quantum Act. Drawing lessons from legislative strategies in the semiconductor (EU/US Chips Acts) and AI (EU AI Act) domains, and analyzing US and Chinese technology policy, we argue the EU needs a 'full-stack' industrial policy. We propose the EU Quantum Act should be a two-pillar instrument, combining New Legislative Framework-style regulation with an ambitious Chips Act-style industrial and security policy. This dual approach fosters innovation through strategic investment (e.g. via a DARPA-style agency) while managing risk through clear, risk-based tiers and regulatory sandboxes. This strategy is presented as essential for EU technological sovereignty and for building a strong transatlantic tech alliance. On the international stage, we advocate for a global non-proliferation framework for quantum and AI wmd's inspired by the IAEA/NPT model and overseen by an 'International Quantum Agency'. This vision culminates in the 'Qubits for Peace' initiative, a global governance structure to ensure quantum technologies are developed safely and ethically. The article concludes by consolidating the analysis into a detailed legislative blueprint.

2025-09-13T16:25:25Z Columbia Journal of European Law, Columbia Law School 2025 Mauritz Kop http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.10740v1 2025-09-12T23:04:23Z

This work aims to formalize some of the ways scientific concepts are formed in the process of theoretical physics discovery. Since this may at first seem like a task beyond the scope of the exact sciences (natural and formal sciences), we begin by presenting arguments for why scientific concept formation can be formalized. Then, we introduce type theory as a natural and well-suited framework for this formalization. We formalize what we call "ways of discovering new concepts" including concept distinction, property preservation, and concept change, as cognitive typing rules. Next, we apply these cognitive typing rules to two case studies of conceptual discovery in the history of physics: Einstein's reasoning leading to the impossibility of frozen waves, and his conceptual path to the relativity of time. In these historical episodes, we recast what a physicist might informally call "ways of discovering new scientific concepts" as compositional typing rules built from cognitive typing rules - thus formalizing them as scientific discovery mechanisms. Lastly, we computationally model the type-theoretic reconstruction of Einstein's conceptual path to the relativity of time as a program synthesis task.

2025-09-12T23:04:23Z 28 pages, 2 figures Omar Aguilar Anthony Aguirre http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.06006v2 2025-09-12T22:49:08Z

In this paper, a solution to Zeno's paradox of motion was offered and a possible, based on observations and empirical viewpoint, interpretation. A gedanken experiment was proposed in accordance to our empirical and experimental paradigm, offering solutions from pendular energy and geometric gravity theory, the standard view, and classical physics, as a reply to Zeno's paradox (of motion), departing from the logical and overly mathematical frameworks, which either offered a solution detached from experiment and observations, the former, and a solution with neither explanation nor interpretation, the latter. It takes on the problem of unmeasurable regions, Zeno's paradoxes (measure and motion), and infinitesimals, offering some insights that could be found interesting for both, metaphysical and foundations of physics fields.

2025-03-08T01:34:12Z Manuel A. B. Bache Jorge Hernandez-Contreras http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.10732v1 2025-09-12T22:39:49Z

This note offers an overview of how Josiah Willard Gibbs's Elementary Principles in Statistical Mechanics, published simultaneously in London and New York in 1902, spread through European university libraries. Contrary to the received idea that the circulation of this text was slow, information gathered through direct contacts with numerous academic libraries, together with an examination of Yale University's archives, reveals an unexpectedly rapid material diffusion beginning on 15 March 1902. This early propagation can be explained by several channels: presentation copies sent by Yale University to leading universities, personal mailings by Gibbs himself to prominent scientists, and the distribution of copies by the American publisher to major scientific journals.

2025-09-12T22:39:49Z Archives for History of Exact Sciences (2026) Hector Giacomini 10.1007/s00407-026-00362-2 http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.10680v1 2025-09-12T20:24:03Z

In this work we address the contemporary debate about quantum individuality expressed as an opposition between those who, like Décio Krause, defend the reference of the theory to "non-individual particles", and those like Dennis Dieks, who propose instead to preserve the notion of "classical particle" as commonly applied by contemporary physicists. We will argue that these viewpoints rather than truly opposed share a common methodology which has helped to reinforce the doctrine of classical concepts that was imposed by Bohr and Dirac within the "standard" formulation --which remains the orthodox physical account of the theory of quanta. We will also discuss a recently proposed relativist yet objective relational account of quantum individuality [25] which, going back to Einstein's methodological approach, opens the doors to a completely new, truly realist understanding of quantum individuality.

2025-09-12T20:24:03Z 19 pages Christian de Ronde Ivan Klarreich http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.09361v1 2025-09-11T11:20:25Z

Jean-Marc Ginoux's recent book, "Poincaré, Einstein and the Discovery of Special Relativity: An End to the Controversy" (2024), seeks to close the debate over the respective roles of Poincaré and Einstein. Yet what is presented as an "end" may instead invite a more careful analysis of how similar equations can conceal divergent conceptions. The aim here is not to rehearse priority disputes but to show how Einstein's ether-free, principle-based kinematics marked out a path that, unlike its contemporaries, became the canonical form of special relativity. To this end, I reconstruct side by side the 1905 derivations of Poincaré and Einstein, tracing their similarities and, more importantly, their differences. This paper reconstructs, in a novel way, the 1905 derivations of Einstein and Poincaré, highlighting their contrasting paths.

2025-09-11T11:20:25Z Galina Weinstein http://arxiv.org/abs/2310.14634v4 2025-09-11T07:51:05Z

This book concerns the metasemantics of quantum mechanics (QM). Roughly, it pursues an investigation at the intersection of philosophy of physics and philosophy of language, and it offers a critical analysis of rival explanations of the semantic facts of standard QM. Two problems for such explanations are discussed: categoricity and permanence. New results include 1) a reconstruction of Einstein's incompleteness argument, which concludes that a local, separable, and categorical QM cannot exist, 2) a reinterpretation of Bohr's principle of correspondence, grounded in the principle of permanence, 3) a meaning-variance argument for quantum logic, which follows a line of critical reflections initiated by Weyl, and 4) an argument for semantic indeterminacy leveled against inferentialism about QM, inspired by Carnap's work in the philosophy of classical logic.

2023-10-23T07:14:16Z This version corrects one error on p.74 Iulian D. Toader 10.1007/978-3-031-89342-1 http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.06139v1 2025-09-07T17:11:57Z

A.P. Balachandran was a theoretical physicist of extraordinary versatility and originality. In a career spanning over six decades, he made many significant contributions to quantum field theory and mathematical physics. His influence extends beyond the impact of his papers, with a large number of research students and collaborators. Here, in an attempt at a coherent scientific biography, I try to contextualize and evaluate his many contributions.

2025-09-07T17:11:57Z 30 pages V. P. Nair http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.04918v1 2025-09-05T08:33:04Z

Can multiverse hypotheses ever receive empirical support? Critics argue that multiverse scenarios posit unobservable entities, face severe underdetermination, or fall outside the bounds of science. This chapter challenges that view by offering a naturalistic metaphysical counterpoint to Bayesian approaches, distinguishing fragmented from holistic multiverses. Scientific proposals are almost always holistic: they embed universes within a unifying physical or metaphysical structure that can, in principle, leave empirical signatures inside the universes. I develop a typology of such signatures and show how it applies to leading scenarios from quantum theory, cosmology, and string theory. This framework clarifies why objections such as the `this universe' objection and a newly articulated generalization, the epistemic isolation objection, fail against scientifically motivated multiverses. The upshot is a qualified defence: while fragmented multiverses remain empirically inaccessible, certain holistic multiverses could, in principle, be supported by the same epistemic standards used elsewhere in physics.

2025-09-05T08:33:04Z Chapter draft for the Blackwell Companion to the Philosophy and the Multiverse Baptiste Le Bihan http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.15229v1 2025-09-04T15:18:24Z

We develop a minimal, timeless game-theoretic representation of the mass-geometry relation. An "Object" (mass) and "Space" (geometry) choose strategies in a static normal-form game; utilities encode stability as mutual consistency rather than dynamical payoffs. In a 2x2 toy model, the equilibria correspond to "light-flat" and "heavy-curved" configurations; a continuous variant clarifies when only trivial interior equilibria appear versus a continuum along a matching ray. Philosophically, the point is representational: a global description may be static while the experience of temporal flow for embedded observers arises from informational asymmetry, coarse-graining, and records. The framework separates time as parameter from relational constraint without committing to specific physical dynamics.

2025-09-04T15:18:24Z Milad Ghadimi http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.06487v2 2025-09-03T16:01:17Z

The so-called Geometric Trinity of Gravity includes General Relativity (GR), based on spacetime curvature; the Teleparallel Equivalent of GR (TEGR), which relies on spacetime torsion; and the Symmetric Teleparallel Equivalent of GR (STEGR), grounded in nonmetricity. Recent studies demonstrate that GR, TEGR, and STEGR are dynamically equivalent, raising questions about the fundamental structure of spacetime, the under-determination of these theories, and whether empirical distinctions among them are possible. The aim of this work is to show that they are equivalent in many features but not exactly in everything. In particular, their relationship with the Equivalence Principle (EP) is different. The EP is a deeply theory-laden assumption, which is assumed as fundamental in constructing GR, with significant implications for our understanding of spacetime. However, it introduces unresolved conceptual issues, including its impact on the nature of the metric and connection, its meaning at the quantum level, tensions with other fundamental interactions and new physics, and its role in dark matter and dark energy problems. In contrast, TEGR and STEGR recover the EP, in particular in its strong formulation, but do not rely on it as a foundational principle. The fact that GR, TEGR, and STEGR are equivalent in non-trivial predictions, but the EP is not necessary for TEGR and STEGR, suggests that it may not be a fundamental feature but an emergent one, potentially marking differences in the empirical content of the three theories. Thus, the developments within the Geometric Trinity framework challenge traditional assumptions about spacetime and may help to better understand some of the unresolved foundational difficulties related to the EP.

2025-01-11T09:10:08Z 30 pages, 4 figures Foundations of Physics (2025) 55:69 Christian Mancini Guglielmo Maria Tino Salvatore Capozziello 10.1007/s10701-025-00882-x http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.02456v1 2025-09-02T16:08:53Z

This paper reconstructs the derivations underlying the kinematical part of Einstein's 1905 special relativity paper, emphasizing their operational clarity and minimalist use of mathematics. Einstein employed modest tools-algebraic manipulations, Taylor expansions, partial differentials, and functional arguments-yet his method was guided by principles of linearity, symmetry, and invariance rather than the elaborate frameworks of electron theory. The published text in "Annalen der Physik" concealed much of the algebraic scaffolding, presenting instead a streamlined sequence of essential equations. Far from reflecting a lack of sophistication, this economy of means was a deliberate rhetorical and philosophical choice: to demonstrate that relativity arises from two simple postulates and basic operational definitions, not from the complexities of electron theory. The reconstruction highlights how Einstein's strategy subordinated mathematics to principle, advancing a new mode of reasoning in which physical insight, rather than computational elaboration, held decisive authority. In this respect, I show that Einstein's presentation diverges sharply from Poincaré's.

2025-09-02T16:08:53Z Galina Weinstein http://arxiv.org/abs/2303.01411v2 2025-09-02T00:45:49Z

We apply recent ideas about complexity and randomness to the philosophy of laws and chances. We develop two ways to use algorithmic randomness to characterize probabilistic laws of nature. The first, a generative chance* law, employs a nonstandard notion of chance. The second, a probabilistic* constraining law, impose relative frequency and randomness constraints that every physically possible world must satisfy. The constraining notion removes a major obstacle to a unified governing account of non-Humean laws, on which laws govern by constraining physical possibilities; it also provides independently motivated solutions to familiar problems for the Humean best-system account (the Big Bad Bug and the zero-fit problem). On either approach, probabilistic laws are tied more tightly to corresponding sets of possible worlds: some histories permitted by traditional probabilistic laws are now ruled out as physically impossible. Consequently, the framework avoids one variety of empirical underdetermination while bringing to light others that are typically overlooked.

2023-03-02T17:00:40Z 18 pages, 2 figures. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, accepted version Jeffrey A. Barrett Eddy Keming Chen http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.01014v1 2025-08-31T22:36:16Z

Today, data and information have become overabundant resources within a global network of machines that exchange signals at speeds approaching that of light. In this highly saturated environment, communication has emerged as the most central form of interaction, supported by a rapidly evolving technical infrastructure. These new communication tools have created an overwhelming surplus of information so much so that no human could process it all. In response, platforms like Facebook, YouTube, and Google use algorithms to filter and suggest content. These algorithms act as sorting mechanisms, reducing the informational noise and presenting users with content tailored to their habits and preferences. However, by placing themselves between users and data, these platforms gain control over what users see and, in doing so, shape their preferences and behaviors. In physical terms, we might say they function like selective filters or control gates in an information system directing flows and creating feedback loops. Over time, this can lead to a kind of informational inertia, where users become increasingly shaped by algorithmic influence and lose the ability to form independent judgments. This process reflects a broader trend that Bernard Stiegler describes as a new kind of proletarianization where individuals lose the knowledge and skills that are absorbed and automated by digital systems. Borrowing from physics, we study this as a shift toward higher entropy. However, platforms like Wikipedia and arXiv demonstrate how digital tools can support collective knowledge without leading to cognitive degradation. Inspired by Elinor Ostrom work on commons, we propose a model for a digital commons economy where information is shared and governed collaboratively, helping to restore a balance between entropy and organization in our digital environments.

2025-08-31T22:36:16Z Master's thesis, in French language Miguel Vanvlasselaer http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.04486v1 2025-08-31T19:10:34Z

With the advent of quantum mechanics by Heisenberg in 1925 exactly a century ago, the quantization of the electromagnetic field became an important goal for our founding fathers, whom we are here to celebrate. It was realized very soon that a consistent picture of quantum electrodynamics (QED) requires the quantization of not just the electromagnetic field ${\bf A}({\bf r},t)$, but the electron field ${\bf ψ}({\bf r},t)$ as well. The electron field is now a Dirac spinor field and it becomes a major partner for the vector potential. Together these two fields form a duet which yearns for a unification which is not often emphasized in text books, but no one knows how to do this yet. The underlying structure appears to be a super-symmetric one where bosons and fermions live comfortably as a single field that could by some yet unknown process produce QED. This area is still at the forefront of current research with names like Super-symmetric Quantum Electrodynamics (SQED), strings and others. Ironically for a variety of reasons, the number of fields in SQED has to be increased and not decreased, defying the objective of an economical unification. Furthermore it is now known that Maxwell's theory is incomplete and that there are situations due to boundaries or topology that demand the vector potential must itself be gauge invariant. (This paper is dedicated to the celebration of 100 years of quantum mechanics, on the anniversary of Heisenberg's founding paper on the subject in July 1925, delivered by Miguel Ortuño at the IQSA 2025 Conference at Tropea in Calabria, Italy from 30 June to 4th July 2025. The proceedings will be published as a celebratory volume by World Scientific Publications, Singapore in 2026).

2025-08-31T19:10:34Z 22 pages, 4 figures Tuck Choy Miguel Ortuno