Notes on Crowther and the "Interpretation" of Quantum Mechanics (arXiv:2512.14315)

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.23721v1
• Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2025 10:04:14 GMT
• Title: Notes on Crowther and the "Interpretation" of Quantum Mechanics (arXiv:2512.14315)
• Authors: Mikołaj Sienicki, Krzysztof Sienicki,
• Abstract summary: We list twelve points where the paper's physics-facing wording could be sharpened.<n>Several claims are directionally well-motivated but stated more strongly than the underlying physics supports.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: 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.

Related papers

• Methodological Realism and Quantum Mechanics [0.0]
  I distinguish two senses in which one can take a given physical theory to be complete'<n>On the first, a complete physical theory is one that, in principle, completely describes physical reality.<n>I argue that while the (neo-)Everettian approach to interpreting quantum mechanics aims to show that it is complete in the first sense, the (neo-)Bohrian approach begins from an understanding of quantum mechanics as being complete in the second sense.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-01T20:07:53Z)
• Quantum mysteries explained in digestible form [51.56484100374058]
  I show how violation of Bell's inequalities, Teleportation, Kochen-Specker and Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger theorems can be understood in terms of vectors.<n>This does not mean that the difference between quantum and classical phenomena is illusory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-23T02:42:26Z)
• The two-spin enigma: from the helium atom to quantum ontology [1.6777183511743472]
  We will show that it perfectly fits with empirical evidence, and can be maintained without giving up physical realism. We will start from experimentally based evidence in order to analyse and explain physical facts, moving cautiously from a classical to a quantum description, without mixing them up. The overall picture will be that the physical properties of microscopic systems are quantized, as initially shown by Planck and Einstein, and they are also contextual, i.e. that they can be given a physical sense only by embedding a microscopic system within a macroscopic measurement context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-07T09:43:30Z)
• A computational test of quantum contextuality, and even simpler proofs of quantumness [43.25018099464869]
  We show that an arbitrary contextuality game can be compiled into an operational "test of contextuality" involving a single quantum device. Our work can be seen as using cryptography to enforce spatial separation within subsystems of a single quantum device.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-10T19:30:23Z)
• A dialog on the fate of information in black hole evaporation [77.34726150561087]
  We present two alternative perspectives for the resolution of Hawking's information puzzle in black hole evaporation. One of them is the central role played by the existence of the interior singularity that we expect to be replaced by a more fundamental quantum gravity formulation. Both views rely on the notion that the standard effective quantum field theoretic perspective would require some deep modifications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-17T16:21:22Z)
• Does Science need Intersubjectivity? The Problem of Confirmation in Orthodox Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics [0.0]
  We argue that any successful interpretation of quantum mechanics must explain how our empirical evidence allows us to come to know about quantum mechanics. We take a detailed look at the way in which belief-updating might work in the kind of universe postulated by an orthodox interpretation. We argue that in some versions of these interpretations it is not even possible to use one's own relative frequencies for empirical confirmation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-30T13:14:34Z)
• The Quantum Revolution in Philosophy (Book Review) [0.0]
  Healey proposes a new interpretation of quantum theory inspired by pragmatist philosophy. The central idea of Healey's proposal is to understand quantum theory as providing not a description of the physical world but a set of authoritative and objectively correct prescriptions about how agents should act.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-23T00:30:38Z)
• Quantum realism: axiomatization and quantification [77.34726150561087]
  We build an axiomatization for quantum realism -- a notion of realism compatible with quantum theory. We explicitly construct some classes of entropic quantifiers that are shown to satisfy almost all of the proposed axioms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-10T18:08:42Z)
• Consistency in the description of quantum measurement: Quantum theory can consistently describe the use of itself [8.122270502556372]
  I propose a slight addition to standard textbook quantum mechanics, in the form of two rules, which avoids the paradox. The first specifies when a given quantum dynamics can be interpreted as a measurement. The second requires that a joint context be used to determine whether several different dynamical evolutions can all be interpreted as measurement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-05T18:00:15Z)
• Testing quantum theory with thought experiments [4.847980206213335]
  How should one model systems that include agents who are themselves using quantum theory? We give a state-of-the-art overview on quantum thought experiments involving observers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-09T18:08:23Z)
• Quantum Theory Needs No 'Interpretation' But 'Theoretical Formal-Conceptual Unity' (Or: Escaping Adan Cabello's "Map of Madness" With the Help of David Deutsch's Explanations) [0.0]
  We argue that there are reasons to believe that the creation of 'interpretations' for the theory of quanta has functioned as a trap designed by anti-realists. We will argue that the key to escape the anti-realist trap of interpretation is to recognize that --as Einstein told Heisenberg almost one century ago-- it is only the theory which can tell you what can be observed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-01T19:10:06Z)
• Understanding Quantum Theory [0.0]
  This paper attempts to clarify some issues that are discussed in the interpretations of quantum theory. One of the main points of this paper is the role of predictions in understanding any theory of physics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-27T16:06:48Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.