A Window of Our Own: Towards a Quantum Research Ontology

This article introduces the idea of quantum research as a way of approaching inquiry in spiritual/intuitive domains. This form of research combines scholarly and analytical knowledge with non-rational, non-analytical experiencing variously called direct/intuitive experiences (Tsao and Laszlo, 2019) or holistic consciousness (Goethe, in Bortoft, 1996). The article is written differently (Vachhani, 2019), and combines quantum theorizing with findings from an empirical postmodern text deconstruction study. The theorizing and empirical findings illuminate the beliefs, values, and norms of the Newtonian paradigm that continue to marginalize a quantum ontological perspective. Through a bricolage (Rogers, 2012) of interdisciplinary literature combined with findings from the postmodern (Beiser, 2011) deconstruction/imaginal study, the incommensurability between the Newtonian paradigm and quantum ontology is exposed. The bricolage illuminates the challenges and opportunities for legitimizing a quantum view of research. The article concludes with recommendations for future quantum research; for building a new window of our own.

Objective Quantum Fields, Retrocausality and Ontology

We compare different approaches to quantum ontology. In particular, we discuss an interpretation of quantum mechanics that we call objective quantum field theory (OQFT), which involves retrocausal fields. Here, objective implies the existence of fields independent of an observer, but not that the results of conjugate measurements are predetermined: the theory is contextual. The ideas and analyses of Einstein and Bohr through to more recent approaches to objective realism are discussed. We briefly describe measurement induced projections, the guided wave interpretation, many-universes, consistent histories and modal theories. These earlier interpretations are compared with OQFT. We argue that this approach is compatible both with Bohr’s quantum complementarity and Einstein’s objective realism.

Quantum ontology without speculation

Existing proposals concerning the ontology of quantum mechanics (QM) either involve speculation that goes beyond the scientific evidence or abandon realism about large parts of QM. This paper proposes a way out of this dilemma, by showing that QM as it is formulated in standard textbooks allows for a much more substantive ontological commitment than is usually acknowledged. For this purpose, I defend a non-fundamentalist approach to ontology, which is then applied to various aspects of QM. In particular, I will defend realism about spin, which has been viewed as a particularly hard case for the ontology of QM.

To Be, Not To Be, Maybe

Philosopher of science Tim Maudlin reviews a recent book on quantum theory and its implications for philosophy: Quantum Ontology: A Guide to the Metaphysics of Quantum Mechanics by Peter J. Lewis.

Karen Barad’s Quantum Ontology and Posthuman Ethics: Rethinking the Concept of Relationality

This article focuses on Karen Barad’s quantum ontology and her attempts to reformulate the concept of relationality. The aim is to show how Barad’s work articulates a new kind of empiricism for the social sciences, by reclaiming the creative and speculative force of experimental practice and by recentering the philosophical problem as a source of inquiry. Relationality is redefined through discussions of diffractive apparatus, more-than-human performativity, and the “polymorphous perversity” of the matter-meaning mixture.