The View From Here: Quantum Reality and the Limits of Perspective

Author: Denis Avetisyan

A new analysis suggests that reality isn’t a fixed entity, but rather emerges from the observer’s frame of reference, fundamentally challenging our notions of objectivity.

This review explores the implications of Relational Quantum Mechanics, emphasizing the role of information, non-commutativity, and inherent circularity in defining quantum foundations.

The persistent tension between objective reality and subjective observation challenges foundational assumptions across physics and philosophy. This paper, Tractatus Quanticum, re-examines Wittgenstein’s logical framework through the lens of the Relational Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, proposing a perspectival realism where knowledge is fundamentally limited by the observer’s frame of reference. We argue that embracing circularity-the inherent dependence of observation on the observed-isn’t a logical failing, but a defining characteristic of quantum reality. Could a logically circular system provide a more accurate description of the universe than traditional, linear models of knowledge?

The Illusion of Objective Reality: A Foundational Inquiry

For centuries, a cornerstone of physics has been the presumption of an objective reality – a universe existing independently of any observer. This framework, while enabling remarkable advancements, generates conceptual challenges when attempting to reconcile theory with quantum phenomena. The very act of measurement, crucial to defining physical properties, necessitates interaction, inherently disturbing the system under observation. This creates a fundamental tension: if observation always influences the observed, the notion of a purely objective, observer-independent reality becomes problematic. The insistence on this objectivity, while intuitively appealing, can lead to paradoxes when attempting to formulate complete descriptions of the universe, particularly at the quantum level, suggesting a need to reconsider the foundational assumptions of the field.

The very act of measurement, central to all scientific inquiry, introduces a fundamental distortion to the system being observed. This isn’t a matter of imperfect instruments or clumsy technique, but an intrinsic property of interaction; to gain information about a phenomenon requires an exchange of energy, inevitably altering its state. Consider, for example, attempting to determine the position and momentum of a subatomic particle: the more precisely one is known, the less certain the other becomes, not due to technological limitations, but because the measurement itself imparts momentum, changing the particle’s trajectory. This inherent perspectival nature of reality suggests that there is no truly ‘objective’ observation, only descriptions relative to a specific frame of reference and the unavoidable influence of the observer – a shift that challenges the foundations of traditional physics and necessitates a re-evaluation of how information is understood.

This work posits that the longstanding quest for a complete, observer-independent depiction of reality encounters inherent limitations, ultimately generating paradoxes and inconsistencies. Rather than a fixed, external truth, information itself is fundamentally perspectival – shaped by the very act of observation and the frame of reference employed. This isn’t simply an epistemological hurdle, but an ontological one, suggesting that reality isn’t a ‘thing’ waiting to be discovered, but a dynamic interplay between systems and their interactions. Consequently, attempts to define an absolute state, devoid of any relational context, become logically untenable, revealing that the universe may be best understood not as a collection of objective facts, but as an intricate web of perspectives, each contributing to a holistic, yet perpetually incomplete, picture.

Relationality: Constructing Reality Through Correlation

Relational Quantum Mechanics (RQM) departs from traditional quantum mechanics by positing that physical properties are not pre-existing, objective attributes of systems. Instead, facts about a system are only defined through interactions with an observer or another system. This means a property like position or momentum doesn’t have a definite value independent of measurement; it is only established when a correlation is created between the observed system and the observing system. The state of a system is therefore not an intrinsic characteristic, but a statement about its relationship to another system, and different observers will generally have different, equally valid, descriptions depending on their specific interactions. This relational perspective fundamentally alters the ontological status of quantum states, treating them as information about correlations rather than representations of inherent properties.

Traditional quantum mechanics often describes systems in terms of definite, absolute states. Relational Quantum Mechanics diverges from this by prioritizing correlations and mutual information as fundamental descriptors of reality. Rather than assigning intrinsic properties to isolated systems, this framework posits that the state of a system is defined by its relationships with other systems. Mutual information, quantified as $I(X;Y)$, measures the amount of information that one system ($X$) reveals about another ($Y$), and becomes central to defining the existence of facts. Consequently, reality isn’t constructed from independently existing entities but emerges from the network of these inter-system relationships and the information exchanged between them.

Within Relational Quantum Mechanics, measurement is not considered a process of revealing pre-existing values but rather an interaction that actively establishes correlations between the measuring system and the measured system. This interaction doesn’t simply record an independent state; it defines a specific relationship and, consequently, a particular perspective on the measured system. The observed outcome is therefore contingent on the specific interaction undertaken, not an intrinsic property of the system itself. This perspective-dependence is central to the argument presented in this paper, demonstrating that a perspective-independent reality is not a necessary component for describing quantum phenomena; reality, instead, is constructed through these relational interactions.

The Mathematical Language of Interdependence

Non-commutative algebra differs from standard algebra by relaxing the requirement that the order of operations does not affect the result – that is, $ab$ is not necessarily equal to $ba$. This property is crucial for modeling quantum mechanics because it allows for the representation of incompatible observables; measuring one necessarily introduces uncertainty in the other. In this framework, physical quantities are represented by operators acting on a Hilbert space, and the non-commutativity of these operators directly corresponds to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Furthermore, this algebraic structure inherently incorporates the observer’s perspective, as the specific operators chosen and the measurements performed define the observed properties, rather than revealing an objective, pre-existing state. The resulting mathematical formalism thus provides a consistent framework for describing systems where the act of observation fundamentally alters the observed reality.

In the mathematical framework used to describe perspectival observation, variables are not assigned definite numerical values but are instead represented by operators acting within a non-commutative space. This means the order in which these operators are applied matters, differentiating it from classical algebra where $a \cdot b = b \cdot a$. The operators themselves define how these variables relate to each other and to the act of observation. This relational character is fundamental; the ‘value’ of a variable is not an inherent property, but emerges from its operation within this space and in relation to other variables and the observer’s perspective. Consequently, measurement isn’t revealing a pre-existing value, but actively defining a relationship through the application of these operators.

The formulation of dynamic laws within a non-commutative algebraic framework necessitates their definition relative to a specific observational perspective. This means that the equations describing the evolution of variables – represented as operators – are not universally valid but are contingent on the observer’s state or frame of reference. Consequently, any attempt to derive a complete, objective description of a system’s dynamics is abandoned in favor of perspective-dependent formulations. The laws, therefore, detail how a system evolves as perceived from a given viewpoint, rather than prescribing a singular, absolute trajectory. This approach acknowledges the inherent relational character of the variables and the observer’s unavoidable influence on the observed system, shifting the focus from an absolute state to a relational one, $f(x, observer)$.

Logical Space: An Emergent Reality

Logical space, often conceptualized as a fixed arena within which states exist, is demonstrably not a pre-defined container. Instead, this work posits that the very totality of possible states emerges from the dynamic interplay of perspectives and their inherent relationships. Consider that any attempt to define a state necessarily involves relating it to other states, creating a web of interconnectedness. This relational framework suggests that the boundaries of what is considered ‘possible’ are not absolute, but are continually negotiated through interaction and observation. The concept of a state is thus not found ‘out there’ independently, but is co-constituted by the act of relating, challenging traditional notions of objective reality and highlighting the fundamentally participatory nature of existence.

The notion of circularity, traditionally flagged as a flaw in reasoning, finds surprising support when considering how perspectives themselves are formed. This work demonstrates that any single viewpoint isn’t an independent observation of a pre-existing reality, but rather arises from a network of relationships and interactions. A perspective isn’t in logical space; it is a product of it, defined by its connections to other perspectives. Consequently, what appears as circular-a perspective influencing and being influenced by the very system it attempts to observe-is not a logical failing, but a fundamental characteristic of relational existence. This inherent interconnectedness suggests that meaning and definition aren’t intrinsic to objects or states, but emerge dynamically from their ongoing interactions, fundamentally reshaping how one understands objectivity and observation.

The conventional view of quantum mechanics posits a reality existing independently of observation, a framework this work challenges by demonstrating that reality isn’t passively ‘out there’ to be unveiled. Instead, the findings suggest that quantum states, and therefore reality itself, are actively co-created through the act of interaction and relationship. This isn’t merely a philosophical shift; the central achievement of this research provides a mathematical and conceptual basis for understanding how observation isn’t a disturbance of a pre-existing state, but a fundamental component in its very definition. By framing reality as emergent from these interactions, the study offers a new lens through which to interpret quantum phenomena, moving beyond the limitations of a purely objective, observer-independent worldview and highlighting the pivotal role of relationality in shaping the quantum landscape.

A Relational Universe: Towards a Consistent Framework

Quantum mechanics often appears counterintuitive because it attempts to define properties of systems independent of observation. However, a relational framework proposes that these properties aren’t intrinsic but emerge from the relationships between systems, including the observer. This shifts the focus from “what is” to “what is the relationship between?”; a particle’s position, for example, isn’t a fixed attribute but a description of its correlation with another system. By prioritizing these interactions, the framework resolves many paradoxes inherent in traditional interpretations, offering a more consistent and logically sound picture of quantum phenomena. This approach doesn’t necessitate abandoning established mathematical tools – rather, it reinterprets their meaning, framing $ħ$ not as a measure of inherent uncertainty, but as a quantification of the fundamental interconnectedness of reality.

The established difficulties within quantum foundations – from the measurement problem to the nature of entanglement – find fresh consideration when viewed through a relational framework. Rather than seeking intrinsic properties defining quantum states, this perspective posits that these states only arise within the context of interactions. This shift isn’t merely philosophical; it actively prompts novel theoretical avenues. For instance, researchers are exploring how information-theoretic approaches, grounded in relational principles, can resolve long-standing paradoxes. The work detailed in this paper demonstrates how prioritizing relationships over inherent properties allows for a more consistent and logically sound description of quantum phenomena, potentially circumventing the need for ad-hoc interpretations or hidden variables. Consequently, embracing this relational lens isn’t simply about reinterpreting existing results, but about forging a path toward genuinely new predictive models and a deeper understanding of the quantum world.

The implications of a relational universe extend beyond physics, fundamentally reshaping how knowledge itself is understood. This framework posits that observation isn’t a passive reception of pre-existing facts, but an active process of co-creation through interaction; the observer is inextricably linked to the observed. Consequently, the pursuit of a complete, objective description of reality-a “God’s-eye view”-becomes not only unattainable, but conceptually flawed. Instead, knowledge emerges as a relational property, defined by the correlations established between interacting systems. This shift encourages an epistemic stance where understanding prioritizes the process of knowing, acknowledging that any description is inherently contextual and dependent on the specific relationship between the observer and the observed, rather than a mirroring of an independent reality.

The exploration of relational quantum mechanics, as detailed in the article, necessitates a reconsideration of objective reality. It posits that observations fundamentally shape what is observed, creating a circularity often dismissed in classical frameworks. This echoes Werner Heisenberg’s sentiment: “The position of the observer cannot be eliminated from the description of reality.” The article’s emphasis on perspective aligns with this notion, demonstrating how knowledge isn’t an absolute acquisition of truth, but a construction informed by the observer’s specific informational state. The inherent non-commutativity within quantum systems reinforces this – the order of observation matters, further solidifying the observer’s role in defining the observed.

Where to Next?

The insistence on perspectivalism, while elegantly sidestepping the persistent measurement problem, does not magically resolve all difficulties. The current formulation, though internally consistent, lacks predictive power beyond that already present in standard quantum mechanics. If this is merely a re-framing, a logically purified presentation of existing results, then the endeavor, while satisfying to the mathematically inclined, risks becoming a beautiful, sterile exercise. The challenge lies in demonstrating how embracing this inherent circularity-this refusal to posit an external, privileged frame-yields novel, testable predictions.

Furthermore, a complete articulation of this relational structure demands a rigorous formalism capable of handling not merely quantum states, but quantum information as a fundamental entity. The logical space, so carefully constructed, must allow for the derivation of constraints on information flow-limits imposed not by physical laws in the traditional sense, but by the very structure of perspective. If it feels like magic when information seems to appear from nowhere, the invariant has not yet been revealed.

The most pressing avenue for investigation, therefore, lies in exploring the consequences of non-commutativity not as a peculiarity of operators, but as a direct consequence of relational structure. A truly complete theory would not merely describe a quantum world; it would explain why it is fundamentally impossible to escape the observer’s gaze, and what logical necessities this imposes on reality itself.

Original article: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2512.06034.pdf

Contact the author: https://www.linkedin.com/in/avetisyan/