https://arxiv.org/api/MqcPHdE6O2lF6CcV/QFs8JsTJFA 2026-06-14T15:10:35Z 5610 450 15 http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.16989v2 2025-06-04T17:36:26Z

This paper examines the physical meaning of the wave function in Bohmian mechanics (BM), addressing the debate between causal and nomological interpretations. While BM postulates particles with definite trajectories guided by the wave function, the ontological status of the wave function itself remains contested. Critics of the causal interpretation argue that the wave function's high-dimensionality and lack of back-reaction disqualify it as a physical entity. Proponents of the nomological interpretation, drawing parallels to the classical Hamiltonian, propose that the wave function is a "law-like" entity. However, this view faces challenges, including reliance on speculative quantum gravity frameworks (e.g., the Wheeler-DeWitt equation) and conceptual ambiguities about the nature of "nomological entities". By systematically comparing BM to Hamilton-Jacobi theory, this paper highlights disanalogies between the wave function and the classical action function. These differences, particularly the wave function's dynamical necessity and irreducibility, support a sui generis interpretation, where the wave function represents a novel ontological category unique to quantum theory. The paper concludes that the wave function's role in BM resists classical analogies, demanding a metaphysical framework that accommodates its non-local, high-dimensional, and dynamically irreducible nature.

2025-01-28T14:42:00Z Arnaud Amblard Aurélien Drezet http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.03383v1 2025-06-03T20:42:17Z

This paper traces the historical and conceptual journey from Bjorken scaling to the discovery of scaling violations in deep inelastic scattering, culminating in the development of Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD). Beginning with the challenges faced by early strong interaction theories in the 1950s, we explore the emergence of agnostic approaches such as the bootstrap philosophy and current algebra, which sought to describe hadronic phenomena without relying on specific field theories. The pivotal role of experimental results from SLAC in the late 1960s is highlighted, leading to Bjorken's proposal of scaling in deep inelastic scattering and Feynman's parton model. We then delve into the theoretical breakthroughs of the 1970s, including Wilson's operator product expansion and the renormalization group, which provided the framework for understanding scaling violations. The discovery of asymptotic freedom in non-Abelian gauge theories by Gross, Wilczek, and Politzer marked a turning point, establishing QCD as the theory of strong interactions. Finally, we discuss the formulation of the Altarelli-Parisi equations, which elegantly describe the evolution of parton distribution functions and scaling violations, and their profound impact on the study of hard processes in particle physics. This paper not only recounts the key developments but also reflects on the interplay between theory and experiment that drove the field forward.

2025-06-03T20:42:17Z 14 pages, 1 figure Giorgio Parisi http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.04262v1 2025-06-03T03:19:11Z

Boltzmann's work, ``Ueber die sogenannte H-Curve," discusses his demonstration of the essential characteristics of the H-curve in a clear, concise, and precise style, showcasing his efforts to persuade his peers. To make these findings more widely accessible, the author aims to provide a translated version of the original article, while also correcting some typographical errors in the mathematical expressions with explanatory footnotes. The final section offers concluding remarks with graphs and relevant references for interested readers.

2025-06-03T03:19:11Z EPJ H 49, 21 (2024) Jae Wan Shim 10.1140/epjh/s13129-024-00085-4 http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.23989v1 2025-05-29T20:30:27Z

The notion of quantum state plays a fundamental role within the Standard account of Quantum Mechanics (SQM) as established by Dirac and von Neumann during 1930s and up to the present. In this work we expose the deep inconsistencies that exist within the multiple definitions of the notion of quantum state that are provided within this axiomatic formulation. As we will argue, these different inconsistent definitions continue to be -- even today -- uncritically confused within the mainstream physical and philosophical literature leading to self-contradictory statements and wrong conclusions. We end with a discussion regarding the untenability of this concept for any rational understanding of theoretical physics.

2025-05-29T20:30:27Z 10 pages, no figures Christian de Ronde http://arxiv.org/abs/2204.12015v2 2025-05-29T19:28:32Z

Two recent, prominent theorems--the "no-go theorem for observer-independent facts" and the "Local Friendliness no-go theorem"--employ so-called extended Wigner's friend scenarios to try to impose novel, non-trivial constraints on the possible nature of physical reality. While the former is argued to entail that there can be no theory in which the results of Wigner and his friend can both be considered objective, the latter is said to place on reality stronger constraints than the Bell and Kochen-Specker theorems. Here, I conduct a thorough analysis of these theorems and show that they suffer from a list of shortcomings that question their validity and limit their strength. I conclude that the "no-go theorem for observer-independent facts" and the "Local Friendliness no-go theorem" fail to impose significant constraints on the nature of physical reality.

2022-04-26T00:56:36Z 18 pages, published version Entropy 2025, 27, 563 E. Okon http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.23639v1 2025-05-29T16:46:01Z

This book is a philosopher's introduction to the idea that our universe is just one of many universes. I present and assess three versions of the idea: one version from philosophy, and two from physics. In short, they are: all the logically possible worlds; all the branches of the quantum state, in an Everettian interpretation of quantum theory; and all the bubbles of inflationary cosmology. For each proposal, I choose one main philosophical question to discuss in depth. They are, respectively: what is a possible world; what is chance; and what is explanation. But before treating these proposals and their associated questions, I set the stage by reviewing physics and philosophy from about 1600 to about 1900; and a final Chapter compares and contrasts the proposals.

2025-05-29T16:46:01Z 179 pages. This is the accepted version of a book that will be published by University of Calgary Press, and British Society for the Philosophy of Science Open Access series. It will be published in an Open Access digital format, with a CC-BY-NCND 4.0 Creative Commons license: so that it is now, and will be, available freely to readers everywhere Jeremy Butterfield http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.22160v1 2025-05-28T09:24:50Z

This paper shall explore the conjunction of eternalism and Everettian quantum mechanics. It shall be argued that there is a strong analogy between these two views. In case there is an indefinite number of worlds and observers that are all equally real, there should be an indefinite number of local times which are all also equally real. Whereas Everettianism, specifically the diverging version, treats actuality indexically, relativistic eternalism treats tense indexically. All times exist analogously to all isolated Everettian worlds. There is no unique 'now' that cuts throughout all that physically exists. Instead, as eternalism propounds, all times exist. The paper concludes that eternalism and the many-worlds interpretation are not only compatible but complement each other, providing a coherent framework for understanding the nature of temporal reality.

2025-05-28T09:24:50Z 20 pages, 1 figure Matias Slavov http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.06957v1 2025-05-26T13:59:26Z

Energy has no definition, except that given by a conservation principle which essentially amounts to defining it as the elements of an open list of unknown cardinality. Entropy, identified by Shannon as information we lack, has too many definitions. This results in an unstable and hesitant interpretation of their link. Thermodynamics, the science of changes in form of energy, is phenomenological, all its laws are induced from observation. From the origin, the concept of energy is linked to the observer's knowledge, to the information he has: what and where to look and with what instruments. Thermodynamics only addresses the sensible world. It is Aristotelian. But this is disturbing if we consider that reason can give us access to Plato's intelligible world, the one that is beyond the sensible world and independent of us. This is disturbing if we consider that science can access to the intrinsic properties of things, those which are independent of us. This is disturbing if we have a purely Platonic conception of science. Hence the statistical mechanics approach ("The rational foundation of thermodynamics", J.W. Gibbs). This is the first pendulum movement of ideas, whose oscillations continue to this day, because unfortunately statistical mechanics introduces many inconsistencies, mainly due to the ergodic hypothesis. Luckily, these inconsistencies are all solved by Shannon's information theory. Sadly, information theory is too Aristotelian and too conceptual. Fortunately, Landauer principle makes it more \textquote{physical}. This is currently the latest attempt to bringing the notions of energy and information back to what is considered the right side of science, that of Plato. Landauer principle is now commonly regarded as a fundamental law of physics. Unpleasantly, it can be shown that this principle is not one.

2025-05-26T13:59:26Z Didier Lairez http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.02149v2 2025-05-26T11:45:43Z

English translation of John von Neumann's 1927 trilogy on the foundations of quantum mechanics with an introduction and detailed commentary.

2024-06-04T09:35:55Z Anthony Duncan http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.12876v2 2025-05-26T09:20:58Z

On a mathematically foundational level, our most successful physical theories (gauge field theories and general-relativistic theories) are formulated in a framework based on the differential geometry of connections on principal bundles. After reviewing the essentials of this framework, we articulate the generalized hole and point-coincidence arguments, examining how they weight on a substantivalist position towards bundle spaces. This question, then, is considered in light of the Dressing Field Method, which allows a manifestly invariant reformulation of gauge field theories and general-relativistic theories, making their conceptual structure more transparent: it formally implements the point-coincidence argument and thus allows to define (dressed) fields and (dressed) bundle spaces immune to hole-type arguments.

2025-05-19T09:01:30Z V2, 18 pages, typos corrected Philipp Berghofer Jordan François Lucrezia Ravera http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.19695v1 2025-05-26T08:50:42Z

This paper critically examines the central thesis of Kieran Fox's "I Am a Part of Infinity: The Spiritual Journey of Albert Einstein"-namely, that Einstein's intellectual development constitutes a coherent spiritual path culminating in a form of pantheistic mysticism shaped by both Western and Eastern traditions. Fox presents Einstein as the modern heir to a long-suppressed lineage of rational spirituality, extending from Pythagoras and Spinoza to Vedanta and Buddhism, unified by wonder, reverence for nature, and a vision of cosmic unity. While Fox's account is imaginatively rich and philosophically syncretic, it risks conflating distinct conceptual registers -- scientific, metaphysical, and spiritual -- thereby oversimplifying Einstein's intellectual complexity. Drawing on Einstein's scientific writings and personal reflections, this study reconstructs a historically grounded portrait of his thought, emphasizing its tensions, ambiguities, and resistance to spiritual closure. The paper argues that, though rhetorically compelling, Fox's interpretation substitutes a harmonizing spiritual mythology for the conceptual rigor and epistemic humility that defined Einstein's actual worldview.

2025-05-26T08:50:42Z Galina Weinstein http://arxiv.org/abs/2310.10684v2 2025-05-26T08:15:33Z

Quantum mechanics has maintained over the years the reputation of being "the most obscure theory." It works perfectly well, but nobody seems to know why. It has been argued that the difficulty in understanding quantum theory is our failed attempt to force onto it a wrong conceptual scheme, wanting at all costs to think about the objects of the theory as, precisely, objects, i.e., entities having continuously actual spatiotemporal properties. This too restrictive spatiotemporal scheme is most probably at the heart of the problem, as also underlined by the Einsteinian revolution, but then what could be an alternative? Many thinkers have suggested that we must surrender to the fact that our physical world is one of immanent powers and potencies. Aristotle did so ante quantum litteram, followed by scholars like Heisenberg, Primas, Shimony, Piron, Kastner, Kauffman, de Ronde, just to name a few, including the authors, who were both students of Piron in Geneva. However, if on the one hand a potentiality ontology puts the accent on the processes of change, responsible for the incessant shifts between actual and potential properties, on the other hand it does not tell what these changes are all about. In other words, the metaphysical question remains of identifying the nature of the bearer of these potencies, or potentialities, and of the entities that can actualize them. It is the purpose of the present article to emphasize that the above question has found a possible answer in the recent Conceptuality Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, which we believe offers the missing ontology and metaphysics that can make the theory fully intelligible, and even intuitive.

2023-10-14T10:00:49Z 48 pages AutoRicerca 31, 2025, pp. 9-93 Diederik Aerts Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.18219v1 2025-05-23T08:33:59Z

The paper reassesses the largely neglected contribution of Avicenna (Ibn Sina, 980-1037) to medieval Tajik-Persian astronomy. Drawing on published primary and secondary sources, it reconstructs the main directions of his scientific activity - the construction of an observatory at Isfahan, the design of a high-precision angular instrument that anticipates the modern vernier principle, the formulation of an original method for determining terrestrial longitude from lunar culmination, a systematic refutation of predictive astrology, an optical explanation for the daytime invisibility of the fixed stars, and the earliest extant descriptions of both the transit of Venus on 24 May 1032 and the supernova SN 1006. These achievements not only anticipated comparable European advances by several centuries but also shaped subsequent developments within the Islamic and Latin astronomical traditions. The paper further notes Avicenna's modern scientific commemoration in the naming of asteroid (2755) Avicenna and the lunar crater Avicenna.

2025-05-23T08:33:59Z 16 pages, 6 figures Rizoi Bakhromzod http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.22999v3 2025-05-23T06:11:49Z

In order to reconcile the entropy reduction of a system through external interventions that are linked to a measurement with the second law of thermodynamics, there are two main proposals: (i) The entropy reduction is compensated by the entropy increase as a result of the measurement on the system (``Szilard principle"). (ii) The entropy reduction is compensated by the entropy increase as a result of the erasure of the measurement results (``Landauer/Bennett principle"). It seems that the LB principle is widely accepted in the scientific debate. In contrast, in this paper we argue for a modified S principle and criticize the LB principle with regard to various points. Our approach is based on the concept of ``conditional action", which is developed in detail. To illustrate our theses, we consider the entropy balance of a variant of the well-known Szilard engine, understood as a classical mechanical system.

2025-03-29T07:32:20Z Minor improvements and two new references Heinz-Jürgen Schmidt Thomas Bröcker http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.15627v1 2025-05-21T15:14:17Z

This chapter acknowledges a gap between the ``non-individuals'' interpretation of quantum mechanics and our world of experience, and begins to bridge it. Section 1 states the problem with Abner Shimony's ``Phenomenological principle''; section 2 briefly presents the interpretation with connection to standard quantum mechanics; section 3 presents the measurement problem in connection with the Phenomenological principle, the standard way out of it, and why the ``non-individuals'' interpretation of quantum mechanics should not follow it; section 4 finally shows two closed venues for such an interpretation (Bohmian mechanics and the Modal-Hamiltonian Interpretation), and two alternatives for such it (Everettian quantum mechanics and spontaneous collapse theories).

2025-05-21T15:14:17Z Invited contribution to appear in D Krause and JRB Arenhart, eds. (forthcoming) Individuals and non-individuals in quantum theory. Springer Raoni Arroyo