A Realist View of the Quantum World

  • Gregg JaegerEmail author


A realist view of the quantum world is given along the lines of Werner Heisenberg’s Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics and set in contrast to that associated with John von Neumann by Henry Stapp. This view is distinguished by, among other elements: (i) the notion of quantum potentia and its actualization which results in classical recorded values of measured quantities, (ii) the grounding of the existence and chancy character of individual measurement events in the plenitude principle as applied to the set of eigenvalues of observables on the space of quantum states, and (iii) the identification of the individuals of the theory by a straightforward individuation principle.


Quantum mechanics Realism Copenhagen interpretation Phenomena Brain 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Born, M. (1926). Quantenmechanik der Stovorgänge. Z. Phys., 37, 863. ; 38, 803 (1926).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Busch, P., & Jaeger, G. (2010). Unsharp quantum reality. Found. Phys., 40, 1341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Crull, E., & Bacciagaluppi, G. (2011). Translation of: W. Heisenberg, Ist eine deterministische Ergänzung der Quantenmechanik möglich?
  4. Dirac, P.A.M. (1930). The principles of quantum mechanics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  5. Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., Rosen, N. (1935). Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Phys. Rev., 47, 777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gleason, A.M. (1957). Measures on the closed subspaces of a Hilbert space. J. Math. Mech., 6, 885.Google Scholar
  7. Heisenberg, W. (1955). The development of the interpretation of the quantum theory. In Pauli, W. (Ed.) Niels Bohr and the development of physics. London: Pergammon.Google Scholar
  8. Heisenberg, W. (1958). Physics and philosophy. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  9. Heisenberg, W. (1960). Sprache und Wirklichkeit in der modernen Physik. Wort und Wirklichkeit, 1, 32.Google Scholar
  10. Heisenberg, W. (1985). Ist eine deterministische Ergänzung der Quantenmechanik möglich? In Pauli, W., Meyenn, K. V., Hermann, A., Weisskopf, V. F. (Eds.) Wissenschaftlicher Briefwechsel mit Bohr, Einstein, Heisenberg u.a., Band II: 1930–1939 (pp. 407–418). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Jaeger, G. (2010). Individuation in quantum mechanics and space-time. Found. Phys., 40, 1396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jaeger, G. (2014a). Quantum objects. Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jaeger, G. (2014b). On the identification of the parts of compound quantum objects. Found. Phys., 44, 709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jaeger, G. (2015). What in the (quantum) world is macroscopic? Am. J. Phys., 82, 896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jaeger, G. (2016). Grounding the randomness of quantum measurements. Proc. Roy. Soc. A, 374, 20150238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jaeger, G. (2017a). Quantum potentiality revisited. Phil. Trans. Roy. London A, 375, 20160390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jaeger, G. (2017b). Wave-packet reduction and the quantum character of the actualization of potentiality. Entropy, 19, 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jaeger, G. (2018). Developments in quantum probability and the Copenhagen approach. Entropy, 20, 420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Leibniz, G.W. (1678). Lettre à la princesse Elisabeth (?) de fin 1678, in Leibniz, 1940, p. 58; Lettre à Jacquelot du 20 novembre 1702 (Raisons que M. Jacquelot m’a envoyeés pour justifier l’argument contesté de des-Cartes qui doit prouver l’existence de Dieu, avec mes réponses), GP III 444.Google Scholar
  20. Neumann, V., & Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik, J. (1955). Julius Springer: Berlin, Germany, 1932 [English translation: Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ USA.Google Scholar
  21. Plotnitsky, A. (2016). The principles of quantum theory, from Planck’s quanta to the Higgs Boson. Switzerland: Springer. Sect. 3.5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schlosshauer, M., Kofler, J., Zeilinger, A. (2013). A snapshot of foundational attitudes toward quantum mechanics. Stud. Hist. Phil. Mod. Phys., 4, 222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stapp, H. (2017). Quantum theory and free will. Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Neuroscientia 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering and Division of Natural Science and Mathematics, Quantum Communication and Measurement LaboratoryBoston UniversityBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations