This article re-examines Schrödinger’s charge density hypothesis, according to which the charge of an electron is distributed in the whole space, and the charge density in each position is proportional to the modulus squared of the wave function of the electron there. It is shown that the charge distribution of a quantum system can be measured by protective measurements as expectation values of certain observables, and the results as predicted by quantum mechanics confirm Schrödinger’s original hypothesis. Moreover, the physical origin (...) of the charge distribution is also investigated. It is argued that the charge distribution of a quantum system is effective, that is, it is formed by the ergodic motion of a localized particle with the charge of the system. (shrink)

According to Penrose, the fundamental conflict between the superposition principle of quantum mechanics and the principle of general covariance of general relativity entails the existence of wavefunction collapse, e.g. a quantum superposition of two different space–time geometries will collapse to one of them due to the ill-definedness of the time-translation operator for the superposition. In this paper, we argue that Penrose's conjecture on gravity's role in wavefunction collapse is debatable. First of all, it is still a controversial issue what the (...) exact nature of the conflict is and how to resolve it. Secondly, Penrose's argument by analogy is too weak to establish a necessary connection between wavefunction collapse and the conflict as understood by him. Thirdly, the conflict does not necessarily lead to wavefunction collapse. The reason is that the conflict or the problem of ill-definedness for a superposition of different space–time geometries also needs to be solved before the collapse of the superposition finishes, and once the conflict has been resolved, the wavefunction collapse will lose its physical basis relating to the conflict. In addition, we argue that Penrose's suggestions for the collapse time formula and the preferred basis are also problematic. (shrink)

There are three possible interpretations of the wave function in the de Broglie-Bohm theory: taking the wave function as corresponding to a physical entity or a property of the Bohmian particles or a law. In this paper, we argue that the first interpretation is favored by an analysis of protective measurements.

In this article, we give a clearer argument for the reality of the wave function in terms of protective measurements, which does not depend on nontrivial assumptions and also overcomes existing objections. Moreover, based on an analysis of the mass and charge properties of a quantum system, we propose a new ontological interpretation of the wave function. According to this interpretation, the wave function of an N-body system represents the state of motion of N particles. Moreover, the motion of particles (...) is discontinuous and random in nature, and the modulus squared of the wave function gives the probability density that the particles appear in certain positions in space. (shrink)

This article introduces the method of protective measurement and discusses its deep implications for the foundations of quantum mechanics.

It is widely accepted that continuity is the most essential characteristic of motion; the motion of macroscopic objects is apparently continuous, and classical mechanics, which describes such motion, is also based on the assumption of continuous motion. But is motion really continuous in reality? In this paper, I will try to answer this question through a new analysis of the cause of motion. It has been argued that the standard velocity in classical mechanics cannot fulfill the causal role required for (...) explaining continuous motion in a deterministic way. However, there is a hot debate over the solution to this causal explanation problem. The existing solutions, i.e. the "at-at" theory, the impetus view and the "no instants" view, have serious drawbacks. After reviewing their drawbacks and presenting my own objections, I propose a new solution to this causal explanation problem. It is argued that the relativity of motion or the equivalence between motion and rest demands that motion has no deterministic cause, and thus no causal explanation is needed for motion. Based on this result, I further argue that the uncaused motion is not deterministic and continuous but essentially random and discontinuous. Moreover, objects have a potential that determines the probabilities of their future positions. This suggests a possible connection with quantum mechanics. Lastly, I give a brief explanation for the apparent inconsistency between the suggested potential theory of motion and the appearance of continuous motion in the macroscopic world. (shrink)

We show that the physical meaning of the wave function can be derived based on the established parts of quantum mechanics. It turns out that the wave function represents the state of random discontinuous motion of particles, and its modulus square determines the probability density of the particles appearing in certain positions in space.

A possible mechanism of nonlinear quantum evolution is introduced and its implications for quantum communication are investigated. First, it is demonstrated that an appropriate combination of wavefunction collapse and the consciousness of observer may permit the observer to distinguish nonorthogonal quantum states in principle, and thus consciousness will introduce certain nonlinearity into quantum dynamics. Next, it is shown that the distinguishability of nonorthogonal states can be used to achieve quantum superluminal communication, by which information can be transmitted nonlocally and faster (...) than the speed of light. Finally, the issue of apparent incompatibility between superluminal communication and special relativity is briefly addressed. (shrink)

In this paper, we propose an ontological interpretation of the wave function in terms of random discontinuous motion of particles. According to this interpretation, the wave function of an N-body quantum system describes the state of random discontinuous motion of N particles, and in particular, the modulus squared of the wave function gives the probability density that the particles appear in every possible group of positions in space. We present three arguments supporting this new interpretation of the wave function. These (...) arguments are mainly based on an analysis of the mass and charge properties of a quantum system. It is realized that the Schroedinger equation, which governs the evolution of a quantum system, contains more information about the system than the wave function of the system, such as the mass and charge properties of the system, which might help understand the ontological meaning of the wave function. Finally, we briefly analyze possible implications of the suggested ontological interpretation of the wave function for the solutions to the measurement problem. (shrink)

This article analyzes the implications of protective measurement for the meaning of the wave function. According to protective measurement, a charged quantum system has mass and charge density proportional to the modulus square of its wave function. It is shown that the mass and charge density is not real but effective, formed by the ergodic motion of a localized particle with the total mass and charge of the system. Moreover, it is argued that the ergodic motion is not continuous but (...) discontinuous and random. This result suggests a new interpretation of the wave function, according to which the wave function is a description of random discontinuous motion of particles, and the modulus square of the wave function gives the probability density of the particles being in certain locations. It is shown that the suggested interpretation of the wave function disfavors the de Broglie-Bohm theory and the many-worlds interpretation but favors the dynamical collapse theories, and the random discontinuous motion of particles may provide an appropriate random source to collapse the wave function. (shrink)

It is a fundamental and widely accepted assumption that a measurement result exists universally, and in particular, it exists for every observer, independently of whether the observer makes the measurement or knows the result. In this paper, we will argue that, based on an analysis of protective measurements, this assumption is rejected by the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, and worlds, if they indeed exist according to the interpretation, can only exist relative to systems which are decoherent with respect to (...) the measurement result. (shrink)

It is argued that the components of the superposed wave function of a measuring device, each of which represents a definite measurement result, do not correspond to many worlds, one of which is our world, because all components of the wave function can be measured in our world by a serious of protective measurements, and they all exist in this world.

Protective measurement is a new measuring method introduced by Aharonov, Anandan and Vaidman. By a protective measurement, one can measure the expectation value of an observable on a single quantum system, even if the system is initially not in an eigenstate of the measured observable. This remarkable feature of protective measurements was challenged by Uffink. He argued that only observables that commute with the system's Hamiltonian can be protectively measured, and a protective measurement of an observable that does not commute (...) with the system's Hamiltonian does not actually measure the observable, but measure another related observable that commutes with the system's Hamiltonian. In this paper, we show that there are several errors in Uffink's arguments, and his alternative interpretation of protective measurements is untenable. (shrink)

In quantum mechanics, the wave function of a N-body system is a mathematical function defined in a 3N-dimensional configuration space. We argue that wave function realism implies particle ontology when assuming: (1) the wave function of a N-body system describes N physical entities; (2) each triple of the 3N coordinates of a point in configuration space that relates to one physical entity represents a point in ordinary three-dimensional space. Moreover, the motion of particles is random and discontinuous.

Recently Lewis et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 150404 ] demonstrated that additional assumptions such as preparation independence are always necessary to rule out a psi-epistemic model, in which the quantum state is not uniquely determined by the underlying physical state. Their conclusion is based on an analysis of conventional projective measurements. Here we demonstrate that protective measurements, which are distinct from projective measurements, already shows that distinct quantum states cannot be compatible with a single state of reality. This improves (...) the interesting result obtained by Pusey, Barrett and Rudolph [Nature Phys. 8, 475 ]. (shrink)

According to Penrose, the fundamental conflict between the superposition principle of quantum mechanics and the general covariance principle of general relativity entails the existence of wavefunction collapse, e.g. a quantum superposition of two different space-time geometries will collapse to one of them due to the ill-definedness of the time-translation operator for the superposition. In this paper, we argue that Penrose's conjecture on gravity's role in wavefunction collapse is debatable. First of all, it is still a controversial issue what the exact (...) nature of the conflict is and how to resolve it. Secondly, Penrose's argument by analogy is too weak to establish a necessary connection between wavefunction collapse and the conflict as understood by him. Thirdly, the conflict does not necessarily lead to wavefunction collapse. For the conflict or the problem of ill-definedness for a superposition of different space-time geometries also needs to be solved before the collapse of the superposition finishes, and once the conflict has been resolved, the wavefunction collapse will lose its physical basis relating to the conflict. In addition, we argue that Penrose's suggestions for the collapse time formula and collapse states are also problematic. (shrink)

It is shown that the de Broglie-Bohm theory has a potential problem concerning the charge distribution of a quantum system such as an electron. According to the guidance equation of the theory, the electron's charge is localized in a position where its Bohmian particle is. But according to the Schrödinger equation of the theory, the electron's charge is not localized in one position but distributed throughout space, and the charge density in each position is proportional to the modulus square of (...) the wave function of the electron there. Although this tension may be resolved by assuming that the electron's charge is not e but 2e, one for its Bohmian particle and the other for its wave function, the resolution will introduce more serious problems. (shrink)

We show that the de Broglie-Bohm theory is inconsistent with the established parts of quantum mechanics concerning its physical content. According to the de Broglie-Bohm theory, the mass and charge of an electron are localized in a position where its Bohmian particle is. However, protective measurement implies that they are not localized in one position but distributed throughout space, and the mass and charge density of the electron in each position is proportional to the modulus square of its wave function (...) there. (shrink)

It is shown that the de Broglie-Bohm theory has a potential problem concerning the mass and charge distributions of a quantum system such as an electron. According to the de Broglie-Bohm theory, the mass and charge of an electron are localized in a position where its Bohmian particle is. However, protective measurement indicates that they are not localized in one position but distributed throughout space, and the mass and charge density of the electron in each position is proportional to the (...) modulus square of its wave function there. (shrink)

It is shown that Uffink's attempt to protect the interpretation of the wave function against protective measurements fails due to several errors in his arguments.

It is shown that the superposed wave function of a measuring device, in each branch of which there is a definite measurement result, does not correspond to many mutually unobservable but equally real worlds, as the superposed wave function can be observed in our world by protective measurement.