Quantum measurement remains one of the most debated aspects of quantum theory. The so-called “measurement problem” arises from the clash between continuous, unitary evolution of quantum systems (described by the Schrödinger equation) and the apparent discontinuous “collapse” that occurs when a measurement yields a definite result. Many interpretations proliferate — Copenhagen, many-worlds, objective collapse, Bohmian mechanics — each offering a story about how the world “really” resolves into facts.
But all of these stories still assume that there is a definite outcome to be revealed — a real position, a collapsed wavefunction, a branch of the multiverse. They differ in the mechanisms, but not in the deeper assumption: that measurement is a special event in which reality becomes determinate.
From a relational ontology, this entire framing is misdirected. Measurement is not a process that reveals a pre-existing fact. It is a relational reconfiguration — a transformation in the systemic field of potential, constrained by an apparatus, enacted through construal.
1. Measurement as Punctualisation
-
Measurement is often imagined as a moment of truth: a particle “chooses” a position, a state “collapses”,
-
In relational terms, measurement is not an event in the world, but a cut within a structured potential,
-
It is a punctualisation: a construal that temporarily stabilises the system under constraint, yielding a local coherence.
2. The Apparatus as Constraint, Not Observer
-
In many interpretations, the observer plays a key role — as a conscious agent, a decohering environment, or a point of access,
-
But in relational terms, the apparatus is not an external interrogator,
-
It is part of the relational field: the configuration of constraints that structure what actualisation is possible.
3. No Hidden Values, No Revealed Truths
-
There is no hidden variable waiting to be disclosed,
-
Nor is there a metaphysical “collapse” that magically instantiates a fact,
-
Rather, the field of potential is structured by the interaction: the constraints enacted by the system-apparatus relation define what becomes coherent.
4. Probability as Modal Structure
-
Quantum probabilities are not about ignorance of fact (as in classical statistics),
-
They are modal grammars: expressions of how potential is structured before resolution,
-
The wavefunction is not a catalogue of what is, but a theory of how potential can actualise under constraint.
5. The Cut Is Ontological, Not Temporal
-
In standard models, measurement is a moment in time: something happens, and the system changes,
-
In a relational model, the “cut” is not a temporal event, but an ontological transition: a perspectival reconfiguration,
-
There is no pre- and post-measurement state. There is only the shift in construal: the system re-enters coherence under a new configuration.
Closing
Measurement is not a window onto reality, nor a rupture in unitary evolution. It is a reorganisation of constrained potential — a shift in the coherence of the field under relational conditions. What we call “result” is not the endpoint of a process, but the stabilisation of interpretation within a structured context.
In the next post, we will explore the role of mathematics in physics, not as a mirror of nature, but as a grammar for constraining construal — a toolkit for managing systemic intelligibility in the face of complexity.
No comments:
Post a Comment