Quick Navigation

Topics

Trapped Ion Quantum Computing Quantum Foundations

The quantum vacuum: an interpretation of quantum mechanics

arXiv
Authors: Eduardo V. Flores

Year

2010

Paper ID

10765

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

100

Citations

N/A

Abstract

We assume that particles are point-like objects even when not observed. We report on the consequences of our assumption within the realm of quantum theory. An important consequence is the necessity of vacuum fields to account for particle dynamics. The zero-point energy is evidence of the reality of vacuum fields. The dynamics of vacuum fields depends on wave equations, boundary conditions and external sources. The wavefunction is an expression of vacuum fields. Particle events are described by probabilistic distribution functions obtained from vacuum fields. We solve the measurement problem by noticing that in our model the wavefunction does not collapse.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2010 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • We assume that particles are point-like objects even when not observed.

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #10765 #69039 SAT, MaxSAT, and SMT for QLDPC ... #69038 Physically Constrained Ensemble... #69036 CARVE-Q: Quantum-Proposed, Clas... #69035 A Modular Approach to Succinct ...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Sign in to react to this paper.

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.