This post serves as an open RFP (Request-For-Proposal) for a new year-long, no-strings-attached funding grant (equivalent to one post-doc) to take aim at making meaningful progress in any of the two following open questions in quantum mechanics, namely the measurement problem and the reality problem using a specific interpretation framework, defined below (see: Framework). In order to apply, please email kevin [ at ] sekniqi [ dot ] com with your resume.

Background

It is a known fact that the act of measurement in QM alters the wave function. In particular, prior to measurement, a quantum system can be described by a superposition of multiple possible outcomes, yet an experiment reveals a single definite result. However, it is an open question to define precisely what the act of measurement itself is. This is known as the measurement problem, which – more formally – aims to clarify the apparent contradiction between the deterministic, unitary evolution of the wavefunction (according to the Schrödinger equation) and the sudden, non-unitary collapse that seems to occur upon measurement. The reality problem, on the other hand, does not ask about the process by which the wave function collapses, but instead asks about what the wave function itself fundamentally is.

Said differently, the reality problem aims to explain what the fundamental nature of the wavefunction is (or if there even is one, making it merely an imaginary calculation tool), and the measurement problem deals with explaining the process by which the wavefunction collapses to give rise to the classical (deterministic) reality.

Framework

There are many different interpretations, including the Copenhagen, Many-Worlds, and Objective Collapse interpretations. There is another interpretation, the subject of this RFP, which takes a different approach. We will call this the Deterministic Randomness (DR) interpretation. The interpretation, in the most basic explanation, states the following: every particle in every field has a budget of information that it is deterministically encoded with, taking on any possible value within a range based on some deterministic structure, and the act of measuring is simply the act of leaking information from the system, drawing away from the budget of other possible values. This is – in principle – very similar to the speed and time duality, wherein every single object in the universe is given a budget of speed and time, and they can choose between the two using a very deterministic formula (see: General Relativity). If the particle moves at the speed of light, it is no longer afforded any time and thus the budget has been maxed out.

In the DR interpretation, there is an information budget. The universe will provide information to be leaked about any particle, but until the information is leaked, the particle takes on any possible value within the deterministic set of events. When the information is leaked, the other possible set of events are reduced to zero. However, the important part here is that the collapse is actually deterministic, we just simply do not know what the function to collapse is (yet). The universe does not provide us with a “true” random number generator. This is the key insight. Instead, every particle is a deterministic function that is seeded with a deterministic value (this is the wave function), but you do not know what the value it spews out is until you run it (the act of measuring). In other words, the universe simulates randomness using deterministic random number generator functions constructed from fields. This is why this is called the Deterministic Randomness interpretation, because while the wavefunction looks random, it is in fact very deterministic, and the act of measuring is the act of running the random number at any given time, forcing the universe to temporarily reduce the information budget to zero. This interpretation works well with quantum entangled particles as well. The deterministic randomness is two wave functions being seeded with the same seed.

In summary, the DR interpretation says that particles are random variables simulated from a deterministic set of rules. All particles are afforded with an information budget, and observation leaks information about that random variable that reduces its ability to spread out across the full probability distribution, and thus collapses. Without information leakage, the budget is maximized towards all possible values.

RFP

The request is to the positive or negative: make meaningful progress towards concretely proving or disproving this interpretation. Only one application will be accepted based on concrete ideas on how to tackle this question.