Beyond the Quantum World: Reconciling Measurement and Reality

by

Author: Denis Avetisyan

A new analysis defends the mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics and offers a pathway to understanding how stable, definite outcomes emerge from a fundamentally probabilistic universe.

This paper argues for the consistency of infinite tensor products in quantum theory by adopting a co-primary ontology of systems and contexts, resolving challenges related to sectorization and the measurement problem.

The persistent measurement problem in quantum mechanics arises from a tension between the theory’s mathematical formalism and our experience of definite macroscopic outcomes. This paper, ‘Comment on “There is No Quantum World” by Jeffrey Bub’, addresses a critique of neo-Bohrian interpretations which leverage infinite tensor products to resolve this issue, arguing that mathematical infinity isn’t inherently problematic when rigorously applied. We demonstrate that criticisms of this approach stem from a misunderstanding of its foundational ontology-one where classical and quantum descriptions are mutually dependent, rather than representing a transition between regimes. Ultimately, can embracing this co-primacy of systems and contexts offer a consistent framework for understanding how stable measurement results emerge from a quantum world?

Beyond Classical Certainty: The Quantum Foundation of Reality

The foundations of classical physics rest upon Boolean logic – a system defining propositions as strictly true or false. However, this framework falters when applied to the quantum realm. Experiments reveal that quantum systems often exist in a superposition of states, simultaneously embodying multiple possibilities until measured – a concept irreconcilable with the definitive binary of Boolean logic. Furthermore, phenomena like quantum entanglement demonstrate correlations between particles that defy classical explanations based on local realism and definite properties. Consequently, a new mathematical language is required to accurately describe and predict the behavior of quantum systems, one that moves beyond the limitations of true/false certainty and embraces the inherent probabilistic nature of reality at its most fundamental level. This necessitates tools capable of representing uncertainty and correlations, ultimately leading to the development of quantum logic and the operator algebras that underpin the modern formulation of quantum mechanics.

The peculiar behaviors observed in the quantum realm-superposition and entanglement-demand a departure from classical Boolean logic, which dictates that a statement is either definitively true or false. Quantum mechanics, however, allows for states to exist as a combination of possibilities-a superposition-until measured. This isn’t merely a matter of incomplete knowledge; the quantum state is inherently indefinite. Furthermore, entanglement links the fates of two or more particles, such that knowing the state of one instantly reveals the state of the others, regardless of the distance separating them. This correlation isn’t explainable by shared pre-existing properties, but rather arises from a non-Boolean logic where properties aren’t definite until measured and are interconnected in ways that defy classical intuition. Consequently, the mathematical framework of quantum mechanics fundamentally relies on structures that extend beyond the limitations of simple true/false propositions, embracing probabilities and complex relationships to accurately describe reality at its most fundamental level.

The mathematical language of quantum mechanics isn’t simply about numbers; it resides within the abstract structures known as operator algebras. These algebras provide a rigorous framework for defining and manipulating the states of a quantum system – everything from an electron’s spin to a photon’s polarization – and the observables, which represent the measurable properties of those systems. Instead of definite values, quantum properties are represented by operators acting on these states, allowing for the inherent uncertainty at the heart of quantum theory. Crucially, the algebraic relationships between these operators dictate the possible measurement outcomes and how those outcomes relate to each other, exemplified by the famed Heisenberg uncertainty principle \Delta x \Delta p \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}. This approach moves beyond classical probability, providing a consistent and powerful way to predict and understand the bizarre, yet remarkably accurate, behavior of the quantum realm, and forms the foundational basis upon which all quantum technologies are built.

Scaling to the Infinite: The Thermodynamic Limit and Collective Behavior

The Thermodynamic Limit and Infinite Tensor Product are mathematical techniques used in physics to analyze systems comprised of a large – ideally infinite – number of interacting components. The Infinite Tensor Product constructs the Hilbert space for N particles as the tensor product of N individual particle Hilbert spaces, and then considers the limit as N approaches infinity. This allows for the study of collective behavior and the emergence of macroscopic properties not present in individual constituents. Specifically, it enables the rigorous definition of thermodynamic quantities and the identification of stable states within many-body systems, effectively bridging the gap between microscopic quantum mechanics and macroscopic observables. The resulting mathematical framework provides tools to understand how complex, emergent phenomena arise from the interactions of numerous particles.

The relationship between microscopic quantum states and macroscopic records of measurement outcomes is formalized through techniques like the Thermodynamic Limit and Infinite Tensor Product. These methods allow for the calculation of probabilities associated with observed measurement results by tracing over the vast Hilbert space representing the system’s many-body quantum state. Specifically, the Infinite Tensor Product constructs a mathematical framework to represent the combined state of an infinite number of interacting constituents, enabling the derivation of macroscopic properties – such as the decoherence of quantum superpositions – which manifest as definite measurement records. This process effectively projects the initial quantum state onto a classical observable, yielding a probabilistic distribution of measurement outcomes that can be experimentally verified and used for predictive modeling.

The Infinite Limit, within the mathematical framework of tensor products, rigorously defines the process of scaling a physical system-comprised of interacting components-to an unbounded size. This is not merely a conceptual extension but a formal procedure allowing for the analysis of system behavior as the number of constituents approaches infinity. By considering \lim_{n \to \in fty} \bigotimes_{i=1}^{n} H_i , where H_i represents the Hilbert space of the i-th constituent, researchers can derive emergent properties and establish conditions for stability. Crucially, the Infinite Limit enables the identification of stable states and the prediction of long-term behavior, circumventing the computational complexities associated with finite-size systems and offering insights into macroscopic phenomena originating from microscopic interactions.

Super-selection sectors arise from the mathematical framework of infinite tensor products, specifically when dealing with systems possessing non-commuting conserved quantities. These sectors define mutually exclusive subspaces of the Hilbert space, representing distinct macroscopic outcomes or phases observable in measurements. A system’s state is constrained to reside within a single super-selection sector; transitions between sectors are forbidden due to the conservation laws governing the system. This partitioning of the Hilbert space effectively decouples different macroscopic behaviors, meaning that measurements performed within one sector will not affect the results obtained in another, even though the microscopic quantum states are entangled through the infinite tensor product. The existence of super-selection sectors explains how definite macroscopic properties, like charge or magnetization, emerge from the underlying quantum description.

Contextual Objectivity: Reconciling Quantum Reality with Observation

Contextual Objectivity proposes a realist interpretation of quantum mechanics by explicitly incorporating the measurement context as integral to defining the quantum state of a system. Unlike interpretations that posit hidden variables or wave function collapse as fundamental processes, Contextual Objectivity asserts that quantum states are not inherent properties of systems in isolation, but rather emerge from the interaction between the system and the specific measurement apparatus and procedure employed. This means the observed properties are contextual – dependent on the chosen measurement context – and that different measurement contexts will generally yield different, equally valid descriptions of the system’s state. The theory does not deny the existence of a physical reality independent of observation, but it does contend that our access to that reality is always mediated by, and therefore inseparable from, the measurement process itself.

Gleason’s Theorem establishes a direct mathematical link between the probabilities obtained from quantum measurements and the geometric structure of the measurement settings themselves. Specifically, the theorem proves that any consistent assignment of probabilities to measurement outcomes, adhering to the rules of quantum mechanics – where probabilities are represented by 0 \le p(a) \le 1 and sum to unity – can only be realized if the measurement contexts correspond to the real numbers represented as points on the surface of a sphere. This means the possible measurement settings are not arbitrary, but are constrained by a specific geometric structure, and any probabilistic rule consistent with quantum mechanics necessitates this spherical representation of measurement contexts. The theorem’s significance lies in formally demonstrating that the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics isn’t simply a feature of quantum systems, but is fundamentally connected to the geometry of how we choose to measure them.

The adoption of Contextual Objectivity as a framework for interpreting quantum mechanics addresses several historically problematic paradoxes, including those arising from interpretations requiring definite pre-measurement states. By explicitly acknowledging that quantum states are defined within a measurement context, the framework eliminates the need to postulate wave function collapse as a physical process. This contextual approach provides a consistent and mathematically rigorous explanation of quantum phenomena, aligning with both the formal structure of quantum theory and experimental observations. Specifically, it resolves issues related to the measurement problem by demonstrating that the probabilistic outcomes of quantum measurements are inherent to the interaction between the system and the measurement apparatus, rather than stemming from an undefined state prior to observation.

Uhlhorn’s Theorem establishes that, within a given measurement context, any two orthogonal quantum states remain orthogonal after being subjected to a measurement process. This preservation of orthogonality is not guaranteed in general, but holds specifically when measurements are described by positive operator-valued measures (POVMs) satisfying the conditions outlined by the theorem. Mathematically, if | \psi \rangle and | \phi \rangle are orthogonal states (\langle \psi | \phi \rangle = 0), Uhlhorn’s Theorem guarantees that the corresponding measurement operators will not introduce any correlation between them, maintaining their orthogonality in the measurement outcome. This is critical for consistent quantum state discrimination and the proper interpretation of measurement results within a defined contextual framework.

Persistent Degrees of Freedom: Unveiling the Asymptotic Behavior of Complex Systems

Tail algebras represent a powerful framework for understanding the enduring characteristics of quantum systems by focusing on their global, asymptotic degrees of freedom. Rather than tracking every intricate detail of a system’s evolution, these algebras distill information about its long-term behavior, effectively capturing what remains relevant after transient effects have faded. This approach is particularly valuable when dealing with complex many-body systems where a complete description of all correlations is intractable. By mathematically formalizing these persistent degrees of freedom, tail algebras provide a means to characterize the system’s ultimate fate, revealing how it settles into stable or quasi-stable states. This simplification not only aids in theoretical analysis but also offers insights into emergent phenomena arising from the collective behavior of numerous interacting quantum components, allowing researchers to predict and understand the system’s response to external influences over extended periods.

The characterization of a quantum system’s long-term behavior, as captured by Tail Algebras, fundamentally relies on the framework of Von Neumann Algebras. These algebras, central to the field of operator theory, provide the mathematical tools to describe the observables and symmetries governing the system’s evolution. Importantly, the emergent properties of complex quantum systems – those behaviors not readily apparent from examining individual components – are often encoded within the structure of these algebras. Analyzing the properties of the Von Neumann Algebra associated with a system reveals constraints on possible measurement outcomes and provides a means to understand how interactions lead to collective phenomena. The connection highlights that understanding the abstract algebraic structure is not merely a mathematical exercise, but a pathway to deciphering the physical realities of many-body quantum systems and their ultimate, asymptotic behavior.

The immense complexity of many-body quantum systems often hinders complete analytical treatment; however, a focus on their asymptotic degrees of freedom offers a pathway to simplification and understanding. By concentrating on the system’s long-term behavior – essentially, what remains relevant after transient details fade – researchers can effectively reduce the computational burden and reveal emergent collective phenomena. This approach doesn’t necessitate solving for every particle’s precise state, but instead characterizes the system through its stable, macroscopic properties. The resulting insights provide a powerful framework for predicting how these systems will respond to external stimuli and ultimately, how they transition between different states, offering a more tractable route to unraveling the mysteries of quantum many-body physics.

The framework of Contexts, Systems, and Modalities (CSM) provides a rigorous pathway for connecting the quantum realm with classical observation. It justifies the use of infinite tensor products – often employed as mathematical idealizations in quantum mechanics – by demonstrating how these constructions accurately reflect physically realizable systems. Crucially, CSM elucidates why macroscopic superpositions are rarely observed; it proves that interference between drastically different outcomes diminishes exponentially with system size N. This suppression isn’t a matter of decoherence alone, but a fundamental consequence of how contexts define the possibilities within a system, effectively resolving the measurement problem by demonstrating that distinct macroscopic states become increasingly orthogonal as the system scales, thus aligning quantum predictions with everyday experience.

The article posits a framework where systems and contexts are fundamentally intertwined, seeking to resolve the measurement problem through a rigorous mathematical structure. This approach echoes Werner Heisenberg’s sentiment: “The very act of observation changes the observed.” Just as the article emphasizes the co-primacy of system and context-necessitating the infinite tensor product to maintain consistency-Heisenberg’s statement highlights how the act of measurement, the context of observation, inherently alters the system being measured. The defense of infinite tensor products isn’t merely a technical exercise; it’s a commitment to acknowledging the inescapable role of context in defining reality, a principle central to both the mathematical formalism and the underlying philosophical implications explored within the paper. This commitment attempts to establish a stable ground for understanding macroscopic definiteness.

Where Do We Go From Here?

The defense of infinite tensor products, as articulated in this work, is less a resolution of quantum mechanics’ foundational problems and more a sharpening of them. Accepting systems and contexts as fundamentally co-primary demands a rigorous accounting of how information flows – or fails to flow – between sectors. This isn’t merely a technical exercise; it’s an ontological commitment. Every algorithm encodes a worldview, and the sectorization procedure, while offering a path to stable measurement, simultaneously walls off potential realities. The question isn’t simply can this formalism account for macroscopic definiteness, but should it, given what is excluded by its very structure?

Future work must confront the ethical dimensions of this exclusion. Scaling without value checks is a crime against the future. The mathematical elegance of von Neumann algebras cannot obscure the fact that these algebras define what constitutes a permissible interaction. The community now faces the task of articulating, not just the mechanics of sectorization, but its epistemic and ontological consequences. What constitutes ‘relevant’ information, and who determines the boundaries of permissible observation? These are not questions for physicists alone.

Ultimately, the persistence of the measurement problem suggests a deeper malaise: a relentless pursuit of prediction at the expense of understanding. Every algorithm has morality, even if silent. This framework, while logically consistent, demands a corresponding ethical framework to guide its application – a reckoning with the realities it chooses to render visible, and those it effectively erases.

Original article: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2512.22965.pdf

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

See also:

2025-12-30 07:05