The wavefunction, Ψ, sits at the heart of quantum theory. It is the mathematical object from which all observable predictions are derived. And yet, its ontological status remains hotly contested. Is it a real physical object? A mere tool for prediction? A catalogue of subjective belief?
Such debate arises from the assumption that the wavefunction must “be” something in the world. But a relational ontology reframes this issue entirely. The wavefunction is not a thing. It is a perspectival construal of potential — a structured expression of what can be actualised under particular conditions of constraint.
1. The Wavefunction Is Not an Entity
-
Standard interpretations either reify the wavefunction as a physical field (e.g. in configuration space), or reduce it to epistemic status (what we happen to know),
-
Both options presuppose that meaning must either lie “in the world” or “in the mind”,
-
A relational approach sidesteps this binary: the wavefunction is a mapping of relational potential — a formal construal of a system’s affordances at a given cut.
2. Configuration Space as Constraint Space
-
The wavefunction is defined over a high-dimensional configuration space, often taken to be metaphysically troubling,
-
But configuration space is not a place; it is a space of joint constraints — a topology of interdependence,
-
The amplitude structure of Ψ encodes not where things are, but how actualisation is modulated across a field of relational degrees of freedom.
3. Ψ as Structured Possibility
-
The wavefunction expresses which outcomes are possible and how their potentials interfere — it is the grammar of expectation,
-
It is not a snapshot of reality, nor a veil over it, but a formal construal: a structured model of what the system affords under current constraints,
-
In this sense, Ψ is like a chord chart in music — not sound itself, but a specification of playable potential.
4. Collapse as Punctualisation, Not Discontinuity
-
In standard interpretations, measurement causes the wavefunction to collapse — abruptly and without mechanism,
-
But if Ψ is a construal of potential, then “collapse” is a shift in constraint topology: the field reorganises under new conditions,
-
No metaphysical rupture is required — only a cut in the field that redefines what can now actualise.
5. The Observer Is Not Outside the System
-
Interpretations that treat the observer as separate from the wavefunction introduce incoherence,
-
In relational terms, the observer is part of the constraint system — a participant in the field’s reconfiguration,
-
Ψ does not describe “the world” independently of observation, but rather the field of potential given a particular systemic framing.
Closing
The wavefunction is not an ontic object, nor a mere instrument. It is a perspectival construal of systemic affordance — a formalised expression of potential coherence under constraint. It lives not in space, but in relation. What it encodes is not where a particle is, but how the field might resolve if further cuts are introduced.
In the next post, we’ll explore symmetry — not as an abstract mathematical principle, but as a constraint on construal that shapes what kinds of resolution are possible within a relational system.
No comments:
Post a Comment