pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.00045 · v1 · pith:223U4WYHnew · submitted 2026-06-29 · 🪐 quant-ph

Quantum Reconstruction and Phenomenology per the Relativity Principle

W.M. Stuckey , Timothy McDevitt This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-02 20:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum reconstructionrelativity principlediscreteness postulateprinciple theoryPlanck's radiation lawquantum superpositionentanglementequality of perspectives
0
0 comments X

The pith

The relativity principle plus Planck's radiation law necessitates the discreteness of quantum states, making quantum superposition and entanglement consequences of the same principle that yields time dilation and length contraction.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper argues that axiomatic reconstructions of quantum mechanics remain incomplete because they take the discreteness of quantum states as a primitive postulate without a deeper justification. By combining the relativity principle with Planck's radiation law as an independent input, the discreteness requirement follows directly, just as the light postulate follows from the relativity principle and Maxwell's equations. This renders both special relativity and quantum mechanics principle theories whose kinematics derive from the same fundamental postulate. The equality of all perspectives then accounts for entanglement without requiring the abandonment of objective or factive models of reality. A sympathetic reader would see this as unifying the foundations of relativity and quantum theory under one experimentally motivated principle.

Core claim

The relativity principle necessitates the discreteness requirement of quantum reconstruction programs when combined with Planck's radiation law, exactly as it necessitates the light postulate when combined with Maxwell's equations. Quantum mechanics is thereby completed as a principle theory whose Hilbert space kinematics follow from this experimentally motivated discreteness, and the fundamental explanans for time dilation, length contraction, quantum superposition, and entanglement is the relativity principle understood phenomenologically as the equality of all perspectives.

What carries the argument

The relativity principle, acting together with Planck's radiation law to derive the discreteness postulate that replaces the light postulate in quantum reconstruction.

If this is right

  • Quantum mechanics becomes a principle theory on equal footing with special relativity, with its kinematics derived rather than postulated.
  • Entanglement is evidence that different perspectives integrate coherently rather than evidence against intersubjective agreement or objective models.
  • Relational interpretations of quantum mechanics that abandon factive accounts are unnecessary once the equality of perspectives is recognized as the underlying principle.
  • The same principle that explains length contraction and time dilation now also explains superposition without additional quantum-specific postulates.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If correct, this approach would allow quantum reconstruction programs to drop information-theoretic axioms such as Information Invariance & Continuity in favor of the single relativity principle.
  • One could test whether other radiation laws or classical field equations, when paired with the relativity principle, produce analogous discreteness requirements in different domains.
  • The unification suggests that attempts to derive quantum mechanics from relativity alone, without Planck's law, would fail, pointing to a minimal pair of inputs.

Load-bearing premise

Planck's radiation law can be treated as an independent, non-quantum input that does not already presuppose the discreteness it is used to derive.

What would settle it

A derivation showing that the discreteness of energy levels does not follow from the relativity principle and Planck's radiation law alone, or an experimental violation of the equality of all perspectives that cannot be reconciled with observed entanglement correlations.

read the original abstract

We use the relativity principle to complete axiomatic reconstructions of quantum mechanics (QM) via information-theoretic principles that are based on Darrigol's "discreteness" requirement or its equivalent, e.g., Brukner & Zeilinger's Information Invariance & Continuity or Khrennikov's quantum action invariance principle. In this approach to the quantum reconstruction program (QRP), the Hilbert space kinematics of QM is derived most fundamentally from the experimentally motivated postulate of "discreteness," rendering QM a principle theory as defined by Einstein. Special relativity is also a principle theory, since its Lorentz transformation kinematics is derived from the experimentally motivated light postulate. While special relativity has a compelling fundamental principle (relativity principle) to account for its experimentally motivated light postulate, QRP has not produced a compelling fundamental principle to account for its experimentally motivated "discreteness" requirement. We complete QRP by showing how the "discreteness" requirement is necessitated by the relativity principle and Planck's radiation law, just like the light postulate is necessitated by the relativity principle and Maxwell's equations. Accordingly, the fundamental explanans for time dilation, length contraction, quantum superposition, and entanglement is the relativity principle. Phenomenologically speaking, the relativity principle is "the equality of all perspectives." Thus, quantum entanglement isn't evidence for the violation of intersubjective agreement or the need to abandon factive or objective models of reality, as in relational interpretations of QM. It is evidence that reality is not a fragmented collage of different subjective experiences from different perspectives, it's a comprehensive and coherent integration of those different subjective experiences per the equality of all perspectives.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that the relativity principle, together with Planck's radiation law, necessitates the 'discreteness' requirement (or equivalents such as information invariance) used in axiomatic quantum reconstructions, thereby completing the quantum reconstruction program (QRP) in direct analogy to the derivation of the light postulate from the relativity principle and Maxwell's equations. This makes the relativity principle the fundamental explanans for time dilation, length contraction, superposition, and entanglement, with the phenomenological consequence that entanglement supports the 'equality of all perspectives' rather than relational interpretations of QM.

Significance. If the derivation were free of circularity, the result would supply a missing fundamental principle for QRP, unify QM and SR as principle theories, and reframe quantum phenomenology around intersubjective agreement. The approach would also strengthen the case for deriving Hilbert-space kinematics from experimentally motivated postulates without additional ad-hoc assumptions.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract and section on completing QRP] Abstract and the section on completing QRP: the central construction treats Planck's radiation law as an experimentally motivated, non-quantum input (parallel to Maxwell's equations) that, conjoined with the relativity principle, forces the discreteness requirement. However, Planck's law is obtained only by introducing finite energy quanta hν for the resonators; the classical Rayleigh-Jeans limit diverges. Because the quantized form is presupposed, the necessity of discreteness is not derived from the relativity principle but imported, undermining the claim that the principle alone accounts for superposition and entanglement.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract and main text would benefit from an explicit statement of whether Planck's law is invoked only in its empirical spectral form or in its full theoretical derivation, to allow readers to assess independence from QM.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive review. The major comment identifies a potential circularity that we address directly below. We maintain that our central claim holds without revision.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Abstract and section on completing QRP: the central construction treats Planck's radiation law as an experimentally motivated, non-quantum input (parallel to Maxwell's equations) that, conjoined with the relativity principle, forces the discreteness requirement. However, Planck's law is obtained only by introducing finite energy quanta hν for the resonators; the classical Rayleigh-Jeans limit diverges. Because the quantized form is presupposed, the necessity of discreteness is not derived from the relativity principle but imported, undermining the claim that the principle alone accounts for superposition and entanglement.

    Authors: We agree that Planck originally introduced energy quanta to derive the observed blackbody spectrum. However, the manuscript treats Planck's radiation law strictly as the empirical spectral distribution (the measured intensity versus frequency that remains finite at high frequencies), which is a non-quantum experimental fact. Maxwell's equations are likewise an empirical input whose classical form is retained. Our construction shows that consistency of this empirical law with the relativity principle across inertial frames requires the underlying kinematics to satisfy the discreteness condition (or equivalent information-invariance postulates). The discreteness is thereby derived as a necessary consequence rather than presupposed within the reconstruction; the relativity principle supplies the missing fundamental account for why the empirical law takes its observed form. This is directly analogous to the derivation of the light postulate. The claim is therefore not that the relativity principle alone yields superposition and entanglement, but that it does so when conjoined with the stated empirical input, completing the QRP in the same sense that it completes the derivation of special-relativistic kinematics. revision: no

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Planck's radiation law is invoked as independent input but encodes the discreteness it is meant to necessitate

specific steps
  1. other [abstract]
    "We complete QRP by showing how the "discreteness" requirement is necessitated by the relativity principle and Planck's radiation law, just like the light postulate is necessitated by the relativity principle and Maxwell's equations."

    The paper presents Planck's radiation law as an experimentally motivated, non-quantum input (parallel to Maxwell's equations) that, when combined with the relativity principle, forces discreteness without prior QM. This fails to hold because deriving Planck's law (as opposed to the divergent classical Rayleigh-Jeans result) requires assuming discrete energy packets hν for resonators; the discreteness is therefore presupposed in the input rather than derived from the relativity principle.

full rationale

The paper's central step claims the relativity principle plus Planck's radiation law necessitates the discreteness requirement of QRP, analogous to how the relativity principle plus Maxwell's equations necessitates the light postulate. This step is load-bearing for the claim that the relativity principle is the fundamental explanans for superposition and entanglement. However, the input (Planck's law) is not independent of the output (discreteness), as its historical derivation requires positing finite energy quanta. The derivation chain therefore reduces the claimed necessity to an input that already contains the target conclusion.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on two background inputs treated as given: the relativity principle and Planck's radiation law. No new free parameters or postulated entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Relativity principle (equality of all perspectives or inertial frames)
    Invoked as the fundamental principle that necessitates both the light postulate and the discreteness requirement.
  • domain assumption Planck's radiation law
    Treated as the second input that, with the relativity principle, forces discreteness in the quantum reconstruction.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5821 in / 1354 out tokens · 56916 ms · 2026-07-02T20:21:24.805039+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

78 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages · 17 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics42, 23–31 (2011)

    Van Camp, W.: Principle theories, constructive theories, and explanation in mod- ern physics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics42, 23–31 (2011)

    2011

  2. [2]

    Quantum Mechanics as Quantum Information (and only a little more)

    Fuchs, C.: Quantum Mechanics as Quantum Information (and only a little more). https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0205039 (2002)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  3. [3]

    In: Schilpp, P.A

    Einstein, A.: Autobiographical notes. In: Schilpp, P.A. (ed.) Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist, pp. 3–94. Open Court, La Salle, IL, USA (1949)

    1949

  4. [4]

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdnwlBB6ozI (2023)

    Berghofer, P.: On the Relationship between Reconstructing and Interpreting Quantum Mechanics. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdnwlBB6ozI (2023)

    2023

  5. [5]

    Relational Quantum Mechanics

    Rovelli, C.: Relational quantum mechanics. International Journal of Theoretical Physics35, 1637–1678 (1996). https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9609002

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  6. [6]

    Foundations of Physics29(4), 631–643 (1999)

    Zeilinger, A.: A Foundational Principle for Quantum Mechanics. Foundations of Physics29(4), 631–643 (1999)

    1999

  7. [7]

    Quantum Theory From Five Reasonable Axioms

    Hardy, L.: Quantum Theory From Five Reasonable Axioms. https://arxiv.org/ abs/quant-ph/0101012 (2001) 22

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  8. [8]

    Annalen der Physik (Berlin)531(3), 1800097 (2018)

    Jaeger, G.: Information and the reconstruction of quantum physics. Annalen der Physik (Berlin)531(3), 1800097 (2018)

    2018

  9. [9]

    Physical Review A84, 012311 (2011)

    Chiribella, G., D’Ariano, G.M., Perinotti, P.: Informational derivation of Quan- tum Theory. Physical Review A84, 012311 (2011). https://arxiv.org/abs/1011. 6451

    2011

  10. [10]

    New Journal of Physics13, 063001 (2011)

    Masanes, L., M¨ uller, M.P.: A derivation of quantum theory from physical require- ments. New Journal of Physics13, 063001 (2011). https://arxiv.org/abs/1004. 1483

    2011

  11. [11]

    European Jour- nal for Philosophy of Science14, 47 (2024)

    Berghofer, P.: Defending the quantum reconstruction program. European Jour- nal for Philosophy of Science14, 47 (2024). https://link.springer.com/article/10. 1007/s13194-024-00608-2

    2024

  12. [12]

    Quantum Theory and Beyond: Is Entanglement Special?

    Dakic, B., Brukner, C.: Quantum theory and beyond: Is entanglement special? In: Halvorson, H. (ed.) Deep Beauty: Understanding the Quantum World Through Mathematical Innovation, pp. 365–392. Cambridge University Press, New York (2011). https://arxiv.org/abs/0911.0695

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  13. [13]

    Deriving quantum theory from its local structure and reversibility

    Torre, G., Masanes, L., Short, A.J., M¨ uller, M.P.: Deriving quantum theory from its local structure and reversibility. Physical Review Letters109, 090403 (2012). https://arxiv.org/abs/1110.5482

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  14. [14]

    Existence of an information unit as a postulate of quantum theory

    Masanes, L., M¨ uller, M.P., Augusiak, R., Perez-Garcia, D.: Existence of an infor- mation unit as a postulate of quantum theory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences110(41), 16373 (2013). https://arxiv.org/abs/1208.0493

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  15. [15]

    Derivation of Quantum Theory from Feynman's Rules

    Goyal, P.: Derivation of Quantum Theory from Feynman’s Rules. Physical Review A89, 032120 (2014). https://arxiv.org/abs/1403.3527

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  16. [16]

    Toolbox for reconstructing quantum theory from rules on information acquisition

    H¨ ohn, P.A.: Toolbox for reconstructing quantum theory from rules on information acquisition. Quantum1, 38 (2017). https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.8323

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  17. [17]

    Quantum theory from questions

    H¨ ohn, P.A., Wever, C.S.P.: Quantum theory from questions. Physical Review A 95, 012102 (2017). https://arxiv.org/abs/1511.01130

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  18. [18]

    In: Chiribella, G., Spekkens, R

    Chiribella, G., Spekkens, R.: Introduction. In: Chiribella, G., Spekkens, R. (eds.) Quantum Theory: Informational Foundations and Foils, pp. 1–18. Springer, Dordrecht (2016)

    2016

  19. [19]

    Philosophy of Science74(5), 761–774 (2006)

    Grinbaum, A.: Reconstructing instead of interpreting quantum theory. Philosophy of Science74(5), 761–774 (2006)

    2006

  20. [20]

    British Journal for the Philos- ophy of Science58(3), 387–408 (2007)

    Grinbaum, A.: Reconstruction of quantum theory. British Journal for the Philos- ophy of Science58(3), 387–408 (2007). http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/2703/ 23

    2007

  21. [21]

    Studies in History and Philosophy of Science115, 102100 (2026)

    Goyal, P.: Systematizing the interpretation of quantum theory via reconstruction. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science115, 102100 (2026). https://arxiv. org/abs/2512.18002

    work page arXiv 2026

  22. [22]

    Information Invariance and Quantum Probabilities

    Brukner, C., Zeilinger, A.: Information Invariance and Quantum Probabilities. Foundations of Physics39(7), 677–689 (2009). https://arxiv.org/abs/0905.0653

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  23. [23]

    Shut up and contemplate!

    Darrigol, O.: “Shut up and contemplate!”: Lucien Hardy’s reasonable axioms for quantum theory. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics52, 328–342 (2015)

    2015

  24. [24]

    https://link.springer.com/ article/10.1007/s10701-024-00778-2

    Berghofer, P.: Quantum Reconstructions as Stepping Stones Towardψ-Doxastic Interpretations? Foundations of Physics54, 46 (2024). https://link.springer.com/ article/10.1007/s10701-024-00778-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s10701-024-00778-2 2024

  25. [25]

    In: Philipp Berghofer and Harald Wiltsche (ed.) Phenomenology and QBism: New Approaches to Quantum Mechanics, pp

    Goyal, P.: The Role of Reconstruction in the Elucidation of Quantum Theory. In: Philipp Berghofer and Harald Wiltsche (ed.) Phenomenology and QBism: New Approaches to Quantum Mechanics, pp. 338–389. Routledge, New York (2024)

    2024

  26. [26]

    Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2024)

    Khrennikov, A.: Contextual Reinterpretation of Quantum Nonlocality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2024)

    2024

  27. [27]

    Goyal, P.: Understanding Quantum Theory: An Operational Reconstructive Approach. In: J. Faye and L. Johansson (ed.) How to Understand Quantum Mechanics: 100 Years of Ongoing Interpretations. Springer, New York (2026). https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.01095

    work page arXiv 2026

  28. [28]

    Conference: The Quantum Reconstruction Program and Beyond (2023)

    H¨ ohn, P.: Complementarity identities from an informational reconstruction, Uni- versity of Graz. Conference: The Quantum Reconstruction Program and Beyond (2023)

    2023

  29. [29]

    Journal of Physics: Conference Series2948 (2025)

    Stuckey, W.M., Silberstein, M.: Unifying special relativity and quantum mechan- ics via adynamical global constraints. Journal of Physics: Conference Series2948 (2025). https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/2948/1/012009

    work page doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2948/1/012009 2025

  30. [30]

    https://iai.tv/articles/ consciousness-is-the-hidden-architecture-behind-fundamental-and-quantum-physics-auid-3523? ts=1777312827 (2026)

    Wiltsche, H.A.: Consciousness is the hidden architecture behind fundamental and quantum physics. https://iai.tv/articles/ consciousness-is-the-hidden-architecture-behind-fundamental-and-quantum-physics-auid-3523? ts=1777312827 (2026)

    2026

  31. [31]

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olT7um1vcxU at 16-min (2024)

    Rovelli, C.: Is Quantum Reality in the Eye of the Beholder? — World Science Festival. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olT7um1vcxU at 16-min (2024)

    2024

  32. [32]

    https://iai.tv/articles/ phenomenal-evidence-auid-1638 (2020) 24

    Berghofer, P.: Phenomenal evidence. https://iai.tv/articles/ phenomenal-evidence-auid-1638 (2020) 24

    2020

  33. [33]

    Philosophy of Science1(2), 163–169 (1934)

    Einstein, A.: On the method of theoretical physics. Philosophy of Science1(2), 163–169 (1934). https://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/ einstein/Method of Theoretical Physics.pdf

    1934

  34. [34]

    Reconciling Spacetime and the Quantum: Relational Blockworld and the Quantum Liar Paradox

    Stuckey, W.M., Silberstein, M., Cifone, M.: Reconciling Spacetime and the Quan- tum: Relational Blockworld and the Quantum Liar Paradox. Foundations of Physics38(4), 348–383 (2008). https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0510090

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  35. [35]

    Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK (2018)

    Silberstein, M., Stuckey, W.M., McDevitt, T.: Beyond the Dynamical Universe: Unifying Block Universe Physics and Time as Experienced. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK (2018)

    2018

  36. [36]

    Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK (2024)

    Stuckey, W.M., Silberstein, M., McDevitt, T.: Einstein’s Entanglement: Bell Inequalities, Relativity, and the Qubit. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK (2024)

    2024

  37. [37]

    Nature Physics8(6), 476–479 (2012)

    Pusey, M.F., Barrett, J., Rudolph, T.: On the reality of the quantum state. Nature Physics8(6), 476–479 (2012)

    2012

  38. [38]

    Rowohlt TB-V., Germany (1972)

    Born, M.: Albert Einstein, Hedwig and Max Born, Briefwechsel 1916-1955, Kommentiert Von Max Born. Rowohlt TB-V., Germany (1972)

    1916

  39. [39]

    Maudlin, T.: The Great Rift in Physics: Tension Between Relativity and Quantum Theory. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T68338z0Row

  40. [40]

    MA: Wiley-Blackwell, Malden (2011)

    Maudlin, T.: Quantum Non-Locality and Relativity: Metaphysical Intimations of Modern Physics, Third Edition. MA: Wiley-Blackwell, Malden (2011)

    2011

  41. [41]

    Annalen der Physik 17(10), 891–921 (1905)

    Einstein, A.: On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies. Annalen der Physik 17(10), 891–921 (1905)

    1905

  42. [42]

    Mermin, N.D.: What’s Wrong with This Quantum World? Physics Today57, 10 (2004)

    2004

  43. [43]

    Foundations of Physics33, 1561–1591 (2003)

    Clifton, R., Bub, J., Halvorson, H.: Characterizing Quantum Theory in Terms of Information-Theoretic Constraints. Foundations of Physics33, 1561–1591 (2003)

    2003

  44. [44]

    In: Saunders, S., Barrett, J., Kent, A., Wallace, D

    Bub, J., Pitowski, I.: Two dogmas about quantum mechanics. In: Saunders, S., Barrett, J., Kent, A., Wallace, D. (eds.) Many Worlds? Everett, Quantum Theory, and Reality, pp. 431–456. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2010)

    2010

  45. [45]

    Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK (2016)

    Bub, J.: Bananaworld: Quantum Mechanics for Primates. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK (2016)

    2016

  46. [46]

    In: Hemmo, M., Shenker, O

    Bub, J.: ‘Two Dogmas’ Redux. In: Hemmo, M., Shenker, O. (eds.) Quantum, Probability, Logic: The Work and Influence of Itamar Pitowski, pp. 199–215. Springer, London (2020) 25

    2020

  47. [47]

    Quantum Correlations and the Measurement Problem

    Bub, J.: Quantum Correlations and the Measurement Problem. https://arxiv. org/abs/1210.6371 (2012)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  48. [48]

    In: Freire, O

    Grinbaum, A.: Quantum Information and the Quest for Reconstruction of Quan- tum Theory. In: Freire, O. (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of The History of Quantum Interpretations, pp. 417–436. Oxford University Press, New York (2022)

    2022

  49. [49]

    Operationally Invariant Information in Quantum Measurements

    Brukner, C., Zeilinger, A.: Operationally Invariant Information in Quantum Mea- surements. Physical Review Letters83, 3354–3357 (1999). https://arxiv.org/abs/ quant-ph/0005084

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  50. [50]

    Nuovo Cimento B 111(8), 937–956 (1996)

    Comte, C.: Symmetry, relativity and quantum mechanics. Nuovo Cimento B 111(8), 937–956 (1996)

    1996

  51. [51]

    The classical limit of a physical theory and the dimensionality of space

    Dakic, B., Brukner, C.: The classical limit of a physical theory and the dimen- sionality of space. In: Chiribella, G., Spekkens, R. (eds.) Quantum Theory: Informational Foundations and Foils, pp. 249–282. Springer, Dordrecht (2016). https://arxiv.org/abs/1307.3984

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  52. [52]

    In: Castell, L., Ischebeckr, O

    Brukner, C., Zeilinger, A.: Information and fundamental elements of the structure of quantum theory. In: Castell, L., Ischebeckr, O. (eds.) Time, Quantum, Infor- mation, pp. 323–354. Springer, Berlin (2003). https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/ 0212084

    2003

  53. [53]

    Cengage, Boston (2019)

    Serway, R., Jewett, J.: Physics for Scientists and Engineers with Modern Physics. Cengage, Boston (2019)

    2019

  54. [54]

    https://sites.pitt.edu/ ∼jdnorton/teaching/HPS 0410/chapters/Special relativity principles/index

    Norton, J.: Special Theory of Relativity: The Principles. https://sites.pitt.edu/ ∼jdnorton/teaching/HPS 0410/chapters/Special relativity principles/index. html (2024)

    2024

  55. [55]

    Pearson, San Francisco (2022)

    Knight, R.: Physics for Scientists and Engineers with Modern Physics. Pearson, San Francisco (2022)

    2022

  56. [56]

    Pearson, San Francisco (2020)

    Young, H., Freedman, R.: Sears & Zemansky’s University Physics with Modern Physics. Pearson, San Francisco (2020)

    2020

  57. [57]

    Cognella Academic Publishing, California, USA (2021)

    Rex, A., Wolfson, R.: Essential College Physics Volume II. Cognella Academic Publishing, California, USA (2021)

    2021

  58. [58]

    Lorentz, H.A.: The Theory of Electrons and Its Applications to the Phenomena of Light and Radiant Heat. G.E. Stechert and Co., New York, USA (1916)

    1916

  59. [59]

    https://www.nybooks.com/ articles/2017/01/19/trouble-with-quantum-mechanics/ (2017) 26

    Weinberg, S.: The Trouble with Quantum Mechanics. https://www.nybooks.com/ articles/2017/01/19/trouble-with-quantum-mechanics/ (2017) 26

    2017

  60. [60]

    Entropy24(1), 12 (2022)

    Stuckey, W.M., McDevitt, T., Silberstein, M.: No Preferred Reference Frame at the Foundation of Quantum Mechanics. Entropy24(1), 12 (2022). https://www. mdpi.com/1099-4300/24/1/12

    2022

  61. [61]

    Supplement to Nature, 580–590 (14 April 1928)

    Bohr, N.: The quantum postulate and the recent development of atomic theory. Supplement to Nature, 580–590 (14 April 1928)

    1928

  62. [62]

    Journal of the Franklin Institute221(3), 349– 382 (1936)

    Einstein, A.: Physics and Reality. Journal of the Franklin Institute221(3), 349– 382 (1936)

    1936

  63. [63]

    Basic Books, New York City (2002)

    Aczel, A.D.: Entanglement: The Greatest Mystery in Physics. Basic Books, New York City (2002)

    2002

  64. [64]

    Bitbol, M.: Is Quantum Nonlocality an Illusion? https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=FquBWsvmgXw (2026)

    2026

  65. [65]

    Continental Phi- losophy Review54, 413–436 (2021)

    Berghofer, P., Goyal, P., Wiltsche, H.: Husserl, the mathematization of nature, and the informational reconstruction of quantum theory. Continental Phi- losophy Review54, 413–436 (2021). https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/ s11007-020-09523-8

    2021

  66. [66]

    Studies in History and Philosophy of Science112, 33–43 (2025)

    Islami, A., Wiltsche, H.A.: The French crisis: Rethinking the phenomenology of quantum mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science112, 33–43 (2025). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039368125000494

    2025

  67. [67]

    https://www.mdpi.com/2624-960X/5/1/7

    Allori, V.: Many-worlds: Why is it not the consensus? Quantum Reports5(1), 80–101 (2023). https://www.mdpi.com/2624-960X/5/1/7

    2023

  68. [68]

    University of Chicago Press, chicago (1978)

    Geroch, R.: General Relativity from A to B. University of Chicago Press, chicago (1978)

    1978

  69. [69]

    The Universe is not a Computer

    Wharton, K.: The universe is not a computer. In: Aguirre, A., Foster, B., Mer- ali, Z. (eds.) Questioning the Foundations of Physics, pp. 177–190. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://arxiv.org/abs/1211.7081

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  70. [70]

    https://arxiv.org/ abs/2206.02945 (2022)

    Wharton, K., Liu, R.: Entanglement and the Path Integral. https://arxiv.org/ abs/2206.02945 (2022)

    work page arXiv 2022

  71. [71]

    Synthese200, 422 (2022)

    Adlam, E.: Two Roads to Retrocausality. Synthese200, 422 (2022). https:// arxiv.org/abs/2201.12934

    work page arXiv 2022

  72. [72]

    Esfeld, M., Gisin, N.: The GRW flash theory: a relativistic quantum ontology of matter in space-time? https://arxiv.org/abs/1310.5308 (2013)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  73. [73]

    Foundations of Physics52, 81 (2022)

    Hance, J., Hossenfelder, S., Palmer, T.: Supermeasured: Violating Bell-Statistical Independence Without Violating Physical Statistical Independence. Foundations of Physics52, 81 (2022). https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.07292 27

    work page arXiv 2022

  74. [74]

    https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.13342 (2022)

    Adlam, E., Rovelli, C.: Information is Physical: Cross-Perspective Links in Relational Quantum Mechanics. https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.13342 (2022)

    work page arXiv 2022

  75. [75]

    Quantum mechanics as a theory of probability

    Pitowsky, I.: Quantum mechanics as a theory of probability. In: Demopoulos, W., Pitowsky, I. (eds.) Festschrift in Honor of Jeffrey Bub, pp. 323–354. Springer, New York (2007). https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0510095

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  76. [76]

    https://mattleifer.info/ 2012/02/26/quantum-times-article-on-the-pbr-theorem/ (2012)

    Leifer, M.: Quantum Times Article on the PBR Theorem. https://mattleifer.info/ 2012/02/26/quantum-times-article-on-the-pbr-theorem/ (2012)

    2012

  77. [77]

    https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley

    Wheeler, J.: How come the quantum? New Techniques and Ideas in Quantum Measurement Theory480, 304–316 (1986). https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley. com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1986.tb12434.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1986.tb12434.x 1986

  78. [78]

    Harper, J

    Barrow, J.D., Davies, P.C.W., Charles L. Harper, J. (eds.): Science and Ultimate Reality: Quantum Theory, Cosmology, and Complexity. Cambridge university Press, New York (2004) 28

    2004