International Journal of Theoretical Physics

, Volume 31, Issue 10, pp 1815–1837 | Cite as

Construction of reality and its influence on the understanding of quantum structures

  • Diederik Aerts


We present a view where the process of detection of existing reality and creation of new reality is considered explicitly, and that rests on the insight that “the present” is operationally connected to the collection of the “possible” experiences that we can live. We developed a formalism in this view and reality appears as a subtle construction from the reservoir of possible experiences, and see that our consciousness of this construction is lost while many deep problems are related to its presence. We apply the formalism to explain the non-classical probability structures in quantum physics and outline the appearance of topological structures of “the present.” This structuring process is going on actually giving rise to the flow of reality.


Field Theory Elementary Particle Quantum Field Theory Topological Structure Probability Structure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aerts, D. (1981). The one and the many. Towards a unification of the quantum and classical description of one and many physical entities, Doctoral dissertation, VUB, Brussels.Google Scholar
  2. Aerts, D. (1982). Description of many physical entities without the paradoxes encountered in quantum mechanics,Foundations of Physics,12, 1131.Google Scholar
  3. Aerts, D. (1983). Classical theories and non-classical theories as a special case of a more general theory,Journal of Mathematical Physics,24, 2441.Google Scholar
  4. Aerts, D. (1986). A possible explanation for the probabilities of quantum mechanics,Journal of Mathematical Physics,27, 203.Google Scholar
  5. Aerts, D. (1987). The origin of the non-classical character of the quantum probability model, inInformation Complexity and Control in Quantum Physics, A. Blanquiere, S. Diner, and G. Lochak, eds., Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  6. Aerts, D. (1988). The description of separated systems and quantum mechanics and a possible explanation for the probabilities of quantum mechanics, inMicro-physical Reality and Quantum Formalism, A. van der Merweet al., eds., Kluwer.Google Scholar
  7. Aerts, D. (1990a). An attempt to imagine parts of the reality of the micro-world, inProceedings of the Conference “Problems in Quantum Physics; Gdansk '89, Jacek Mizerskiet al., eds., World Scientific, Singapore.Google Scholar
  8. Aerts, D. (1990b). A mechanistic classical laboratory situation violating the Bell inequalities with\(2 \cdot \sqrt 2\), exactly “in the same way” as its violations by the EPR experiments,Helvetica Physica Acta,64, 1.Google Scholar
  9. Aerts, D. (1990c). The construction of reality, TENA, VUB, Brussels.Google Scholar
  10. Aerts, D., and Reignier, J. (1991a). The spin of a quantum entity and problems of non-locality, inProceedings of Symposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics 1990, Pekka Lahtiet al., eds., World Scientific, Singapore.Google Scholar
  11. Aerts, D., and Reignier, J. (1991b). On the problem of non-locality in quantum mechanics,Helvetica Physica Acta,64, 527.Google Scholar
  12. Aerts, D., and Van Bogaert, B. (1992). A mechanistic classical laboratory situation with a quantum logic structure,International Journal of Theoretical Physics, this issue.Google Scholar
  13. Beltrametti, E., and Cassinelli, G. (1981).The Logic of Quantum Mechanics, Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  14. Beltrametti, E., and van Fraassen, B. C., eds. (1981).Current Issues in Quantum Logic, Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  15. Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., and Rosen, N. (1935). Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete,Physical Review,47, 777–780.Google Scholar
  16. Feynman, R. (1970).Feynman Lectures in Physics, Vol. 1, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  17. Foulis, D. J., and Randall, C. H. (1985). Dirac revisited, inSymposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics 1985, P. Lahti and P. Mittelstaedt, eds., World Scientific, Singapore.Google Scholar
  18. Mittelstaedt, P.,et al., eds. (1985).Recent Developments in Quantum Logic, Bibliographisches Institut, Mannheim.Google Scholar
  19. Piaget, J. (1969).The Child's Conception of Time, Routledge and Kegan, London.Google Scholar
  20. Piaget, J., and Inhelder, B. (1971).The Child's Conception of Space, Routledge and Kegan, London.Google Scholar
  21. Piron, C. (1976).Foundations of Quantum Physics, Benjamin, Reading, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  22. Piron, C. (1989). Recent developments in quantum mechanics,Helvetica Physica Acta,62, 82.Google Scholar
  23. Piron, C. (1990).Mécanique Quantique, Bases et Applications, Press Polytechnique et Universitaire Romande, Lausanne.Google Scholar
  24. Poincaré, H. (1902).La science et l'hypothèse, Flammarion, Paris.Google Scholar
  25. Randall, C. H., and Foulis, D. J. (1983a). A mathematical language for quantum physics, inLes Fondements de la Mécanique Quantique, C. Gruber, ed., AVCP, Lausanne, pp. 63–148.Google Scholar
  26. Randall, C. H., and Foulis, D. J. (1983b). Properties and operational propositions in quantum mechanics,Foundations of Physics,13, 843.Google Scholar
  27. Schrödinger, E. (1944).What is Life?, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Diederik Aerts
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Theoretical PhysicsVrije Universiteit BrusselBrussels

Personalised recommendations