pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.01349 · v1 · pith:6K2ORUWVnew · submitted 2026-05-31 · 🪐 quant-ph

Is Quantum Mechanics Universal? EWF Experiments and Non Absoluteness of Events

Herve Zwirn This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 16:40 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum mechanicsnon-absoluteness of eventsConvivial SolipsismWigner experimentsperspectival outcomesscientific intersubjectivityuniversality of quantum mechanics
0
0 comments X

The pith

Convivial Solipsism provides a precise formulation of non-absolute events that preserves the universality of quantum mechanics.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Extended Wigner-type experiments create tension between quantum universality, event absoluteness, and physical reality. The paper shows that non-absoluteness of events requires a precise conceptual formulation to avoid ambiguity and implicit observer-independent structure. Convivial Solipsism supplies this formulation in a way that keeps quantum mechanics universal without a global viewpoint. It resolves the conflict between perspectival outcomes and intersubjectivity by basing objectivity on the coherence of perspectives instead of absolute facts.

Core claim

Convivial Solipsism offers a coherent and fully articulated account of non-absolute events, preserving the universality of quantum mechanics while avoiding the need for a global viewpoint. This approach resolves the apparent conflict between perspectival outcomes and scientific intersubjectivity. Scientific objectivity does not rely on observer-independent facts, but on the internal coherence of perspectival structures.

What carries the argument

Convivial Solipsism as a framework for defining non-absolute events that maintains consistency across perspectives.

If this is right

  • Quantum mechanics can be universal even when events are not absolute.
  • No global viewpoint is needed to describe quantum reality.
  • Scientific intersubjectivity arises from coherent perspectival structures.
  • Existing approaches to non-absoluteness often fail by reintroducing absolute elements or underdetermining concepts.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • This formulation could be applied to other no-go theorems in quantum foundations involving observer perspectives.
  • It suggests that intersubjectivity in science can be maintained without assuming a single shared reality.
  • Further development might lead to new ways of modeling measurement in quantum theory that emphasize relational aspects.

Load-bearing premise

That non-absoluteness of events can be formulated precisely without implicitly reintroducing observer-independent structure or leaving key notions underdetermined.

What would settle it

An argument or result showing that any consistent formulation of non-absolute events must either reintroduce absolute facts or fail to preserve quantum universality and intersubjectivity.

read the original abstract

Extended Wigner-type experiments reveal a fundamental tension between the universality of quantum mechanics, the absoluteness of observed events, and the structure of physical reality. While recent no-go theorems suggest that these assumptions cannot be jointly maintained, their interpretation remains unclear. In particular, the claim that events are not absolute is often left at the level of an interpretive slogan, without a precise conceptual formulation. In this paper, we analyse the conceptual structure underlying these results and show that the non-absoluteness of events requires a precise formulation in order to avoid ambiguity. We argue that many existing approaches fail to provide such a formulation, either by implicitly reintroducing observer-independent structure or by leaving key notions underdetermined. Within this framework, Convivial Solipsism offers a coherent and fully articulated account of non-absolute events, preserving the universality of quantum mechanics while avoiding the need for a global viewpoint. We show in particular that this approach resolves the apparent conflict between perspectival outcomes and scientific intersubjectivity. These results suggest that scientific objectivity does not rely on observer-independent facts, but on the internal coherence of perspectival structures.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines the conceptual implications of Extended Wigner Friend (EWF) experiments, arguing that they reveal a tension between the universality of quantum mechanics, the absoluteness of events, and the structure of physical reality. It contends that non-absoluteness requires a precise formulation to avoid ambiguity or implicit reintroduction of observer-independent structure, critiques existing approaches for failing in this regard, and proposes Convivial Solipsism as providing a coherent account that preserves QM universality, avoids any global viewpoint, and reconciles perspectival outcomes with intersubjectivity through the internal coherence of perspectival structures rather than shared facts.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the work would contribute to quantum foundations by supplying a detailed interpretive framework for non-absolute events that maintains QM universality without a global ontology. The focus on conceptual precision and the reconciliation of perspectival outcomes with intersubjectivity could inform ongoing debates, though its significance is tempered by the purely conceptual nature of the argument and the absence of an independent benchmark for the proposed coherence relation.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The load-bearing move from perspectival outcomes to intersubjective agreement via 'internal coherence of perspectival structures' (Abstract) lacks a formal criterion or external benchmark supplied in the manuscript; without this, it remains unclear whether the coherence relation avoids underdetermination or implicitly reintroduces the observer-independent structure the paper criticizes in other approaches.
  2. [Abstract] The claim that many existing approaches fail to provide a precise formulation of non-absoluteness (Abstract) is central to motivating Convivial Solipsism, yet the text supplies no explicit derivation, counter-example, or section-by-section analysis of those approaches, which is necessary to substantiate the critique as load-bearing for the paper's positive proposal.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The acronym EWF is introduced without expansion or reference, which reduces clarity for readers not already familiar with the literature on Wigner-friend experiments.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting these points of conceptual precision. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] The load-bearing move from perspectival outcomes to intersubjective agreement via 'internal coherence of perspectival structures' (Abstract) lacks a formal criterion or external benchmark supplied in the manuscript; without this, it remains unclear whether the coherence relation avoids underdetermination or implicitly reintroduces the observer-independent structure the paper criticizes in other approaches.

    Authors: The manuscript develops the notion of internal coherence through the relational structure of perspectival descriptions in Convivial Solipsism, showing how intersubjective agreement can arise from consistency requirements internal to each perspective. We acknowledge, however, that the abstract does not supply an explicit formal criterion or benchmark. To resolve the concern about underdetermination, we will add a dedicated paragraph in the main text that articulates a consistency condition on perspectival transformations and explains why this condition does not reintroduce observer-independent facts. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] The claim that many existing approaches fail to provide a precise formulation of non-absoluteness (Abstract) is central to motivating Convivial Solipsism, yet the text supplies no explicit derivation, counter-example, or section-by-section analysis of those approaches, which is necessary to substantiate the critique as load-bearing for the paper's positive proposal.

    Authors: The body of the paper contains critiques of several interpretations for either reintroducing absolute events or leaving non-absoluteness underdetermined. Nevertheless, we accept that these critiques would be stronger if presented as an explicit, section-by-section comparison with concrete counter-examples. We will therefore insert a new subsection that systematically examines representative approaches (e.g., QBism, relational quantum mechanics, and many-worlds) and identifies the precise point at which each fails to articulate non-absoluteness without ambiguity. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper advances a conceptual argument that existing approaches to non-absoluteness of events are ambiguous or reintroduce observer-independent structure, then positions Convivial Solipsism as supplying a coherent formulation that preserves QM universality and reconciles perspectival outcomes with intersubjectivity. No equations, fitted parameters, or derivations appear in the abstract. The claim that the framework 'offers a coherent and fully articulated account' and 'resolves the apparent conflict' is presented as an interpretive conclusion rather than a reduction of an output to its own definitional inputs. Self-reference to the author's prior conceptual work on Convivial Solipsism is normal scholarly practice and does not function as a load-bearing self-citation chain or self-definitional loop under the stated criteria, because the paper supplies no formal criterion or theorem whose validity is exhausted by the framework's own stipulations. The argument remains self-contained against external benchmarks in the sense that it offers a philosophical analysis without claiming a 'prediction' or 'first-principles result' that collapses into its premises by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that quantum mechanics is universal and on the interpretive premise that events lack absoluteness; no numerical free parameters or new physical entities are introduced.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Quantum mechanics is universal across all observers and systems.
    Stated in the opening sentence of the abstract as a maintained premise.
  • domain assumption No-go theorems from EWF experiments correctly identify an incompatibility among universality, absoluteness of events, and physical reality.
    Invoked to motivate the need for a new formulation of non-absoluteness.
invented entities (1)
  • Convivial Solipsism no independent evidence
    purpose: To supply a coherent account of non-absolute events without a global viewpoint.
    Presented as the framework that resolves the tension; no independent falsifiable prediction is supplied in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5720 in / 1407 out tokens · 23552 ms · 2026-06-28T16:40:01.596453+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages · 7 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Leifer, M. S. : Is the quantum state real? An extended review of ψ-ontology theorems. Quanta 3, 67–155 (2014). DOI:10.12743/quanta.v3i1.22. arXiv:1409.1570

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.12743/quanta.v3i1.22 2014

  2. [2]

    Schmid, D., Yıng, Y., Leifer, M. S. : A review and analysis of six extended Wigner’s friend arguments. arXiv:2308.16220 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    : Copenhagenish Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics

    Schmid, D., Yıng, Y., Leifer, M. : Copenhagenish Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. In: Zwirn, H. (Ed.), Quantum Physics and Cosmology: The Mysteries of the Infinitely Small and the Infinitely Large (ISTE Wiley, 2025)

    2025

  4. [4]

    C., Rimini, A., Weber, T

    Ghirardi, G. C., Rimini, A., Weber, T. : Unified dynamics for microscopic and macroscopic systems. Physical Review D 34, 470 (1986)

    1986

  5. [5]

    : Models for universal reduction of macroscopic quantum fluctuations

    Diosi, L. : Models for universal reduction of macroscopic quantum fluctuations. Physical Review A 40, 1165–1174 (1989)

    1989

  6. [6]

    : On gravity’s role in quantum state reduction

    Penrose, R. : On gravity’s role in quantum state reduction. General Relativity and Gravitation 28, 581–600 (1996)

    1996

  7. [7]

    : On the foundations of quantum mechanics

    Everett, H. : On the foundations of quantum mechanics. Ph.D. thesis, Princeton University (1957)

    1957

  8. [8]

    : Relative state formulation of quantum mechanics

    Everett, H. : Relative state formulation of quantum mechanics. Reviews of Modern Physics 29, 454–462 (1957). 32

    1957

  9. [9]

    S., Graham, N

    DeWitt, B. S., Graham, N. (Eds.) : The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (Princeton University Press, 1973)

    1973

  10. [10]

    : A suggested interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of “hidden” variables

    Bohm, D. : A suggested interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of “hidden” variables. Physical Review 85, 166–193 (1952)

    1952

  11. [11]

    Spekkens, R. W. : Evidence for the epistemic view of quantum states. Physical Review A 75, 032110 (2007). arXiv:quant-ph/0401052

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  12. [12]

    Harrigan, N., Spekkens, R. W. : Contexts, systems, and modalities: A new ontology for quantum mechanics. Foundations of Physics 40, 125 (2010). arXiv:0706.2661

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  13. [13]

    : Convivial Solipsism as a maximally perspectival interpretation

    Zwirn, H. : Convivial Solipsism as a maximally perspectival interpretation. Foundations of Physics 54, 39 (2024). arXiv:2310.06815

    work page arXiv 2024

  14. [14]

    : Everett’s interpretation and Convivial Solipsism

    Zwirn, H. : Everett’s interpretation and Convivial Solipsism. Quantum Reports 5, 267–281 (2023). https://doi.org/10.3390/quantum5010018

    work page doi:10.3390/quantum5010018 2023

  15. [15]

    : The problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics

    Kochen, S., Specker, E. : The problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics 17 (1967)

    1967

  16. [16]

    Quantum-Bayesian Coherence

    Fuchs, C. A., Schack, R. : Quantum-Bayesian coherence. Reviews of Modern Physics 85, 1693 (2013). arXiv:0906.2187

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  17. [17]

    Quantum Measurement and the Paulian Idea

    Fuchs, C. A., Schack, R. : Quantum measurement and the Paulian idea. arXiv:1412.4209 (2014)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  18. [18]

    QBism and the Greeks: why a quantum state does not represent an element of physical reality

    Fuchs, C. A., Schack, R. : QBism and the Greeks: Why a quantum state does not represent an element of physical reality. Physica Scripta 90(1) (2015). arXiv:1412.4211

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  19. [19]

    Enrico Fermi

    Fuchs, C. A., Stacey, B. C. : QBism: Quantum theory as a hero’s handbook. In: Rasel, E. M., Schleich, W. P., Wölk, S. (Eds.), Proceedings of the International School of Physics “Enrico Fermi”, Course 197 (Italian Physical Society, 2019). arXiv:1612.07308

    work page arXiv 2019

  20. [20]

    : Is QBism a possible solution to the conceptual problems of quantum mechanics? In: The Oxford Handbook of the History of Quantum Interpretations (2022)

    Zwirn, H. : Is QBism a possible solution to the conceptual problems of quantum mechanics? In: The Oxford Handbook of the History of Quantum Interpretations (2022). arXiv:1912.11636

    work page arXiv 2022

  21. [21]

    : The measurement problem: Decoherence and Convivial Solipsism

    Zwirn, H. : The measurement problem: Decoherence and Convivial Solipsism. Foundations of Physics 46, 635–667 (2016)

    2016

  22. [22]

    : Non-locality versus modified realism: Convivial Solipsism

    Zwirn, H. : Non-locality versus modified realism: Convivial Solipsism. Foundations of Physics 50, 1–26 (2020). arXiv:1812.06451

    work page arXiv 2020

  23. [23]

    : Is the past determined? Foundations of Physics 51, 57 (2021)

    Zwirn, H. : Is the past determined? Foundations of Physics 51, 57 (2021). arXiv:2009.02588

    work page arXiv 2021

  24. [24]

    : Quantum theory: A pragmatist approach

    Healey, R. : Quantum theory: A pragmatist approach. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 63, 729–771 (2012)

    2012

  25. [25]

    : Quantum-Bayesian and pragmatist views of quantum theory

    Healey, R. : Quantum-Bayesian and pragmatist views of quantum theory. In: Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2016)

    2016

  26. [26]

    : The Quantum Revolution in Philosophy (Oxford University Press, 2017)

    Healey, R. : The Quantum Revolution in Philosophy (Oxford University Press, 2017)

    2017

  27. [27]

    : Quantum theory from a pragmatist perspective

    Healey, R. : Quantum theory from a pragmatist perspective. In: Zwirn, H. (Ed.), Quantum Physics and Cosmology (ISTE Wiley, 2025)

    2025

  28. [28]

    : Contexts, systems, modalities

    Auffèves, A., Grangier, P. : Contexts, systems, modalities. Foundations of Physics 46, 121–137 (2016)

    2016

  29. [29]

    : Revisiting quantum contextuality

    Van Den Bosche, M., Grangier, P. : Revisiting quantum contextuality. arXiv:2304.07757 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  30. [30]

    : Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics

    Faye, J. : Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. In: Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2019)

    2019

  31. [31]

    : Quantum Mechanics (Wiley, 2019)

    Cohen-Tannoudji, C., Diu, B., Laloë, F. : Quantum Mechanics (Wiley, 2019)

    2019

  32. [32]

    : Relational quantum mechanics

    Rovelli, C. : Relational quantum mechanics. International Journal of Theoretical Physics 35(8), 1637– 1678 (1996)

    1996

  33. [33]

    : Relational quantum mechanics

    Laudisa, F., Rovelli, C. : Relational quantum mechanics. In: Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2021)

    2021

  34. [34]

    : Stable facts, relative facts

    Di Biagio, A., Rovelli, C. : Stable facts, relative facts. Foundations of Physics 51(1), 30 (2021)

    2021

  35. [35]

    : Relative information, relative facts

    Di Biagio, A., Rovelli, C. : Relative information, relative facts. arXiv:2510.11349 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    : A perspectival version of the modal interpretation

    Bene, G., Dieks, D. : A perspectival version of the modal interpretation. Foundations of Physics 32, 645–671 (2002)

    2002

  37. [37]

    : Perspectival quantum realism

    Dieks, D. : Perspectival quantum realism. Foundations of Physics 52, 95 (2022)

    2022

  38. [38]

    : Radical perspectivalism, locality and relativity

    Dieks, D. : Radical perspectivalism, locality and relativity. Foundations of Physics 55, 30 (2025)

    2025

  39. [39]

    : The role of the observer

    Zwirn, H. : The role of the observer. In: Zwirn, H. (Ed.), Quantum Physics and Cosmology (ISTE Wiley, 2025)

    2025

  40. [40]

    : Are events absolute? arXiv:2507.14672, to appear (2026)

    Zwirn, H. : Are events absolute? arXiv:2507.14672, to appear (2026)

    work page arXiv 2026

  41. [41]

    The Measurement Problem: Decoherence and Convivial Solipsism

    Zwirn, H. : The measurement problem (long version). arXiv:1505.05029 (2015)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  42. [42]

    : On the quantum measurement problem

    Brukner, Č. : On the quantum measurement problem. In: Bertlmann, R., Zeilinger, A. (Eds.), Quantum [Un]speakables II (Springer, 2017)

    2017

  43. [43]

    : A no-go theorem for observer-independent facts

    Brukner, Č. : A no-go theorem for observer-independent facts. Entropy 20(5) (2018)

    2018

  44. [44]

    Wigner, E. P. : Remarks on the mind-body question. In: Good, I. J. (Ed.), The Scientist Speculates (1962)

    1962

  45. [45]

    : What does non-absoluteness mean? Foundations of Physics 54, 1–43 (2024)

    Adlam, E. : What does non-absoluteness mean? Foundations of Physics 54, 1–43 (2024)

    2024

  46. [46]

    : Reassessing Wigner’s friend theorems

    Okon, E. : Reassessing Wigner’s friend theorems. arXiv:2204.12015 (2022)

    work page arXiv 2022

  47. [47]

    Ormrod and J

    Ormrod, N., Barrett, J. : No-go theorem for absolute events. arXiv:2209.03940 (2022)

    work page arXiv 2022

  48. [48]

    Bong, K.-W. et al. : A strong no-go theorem on Wigner’s friend. Nature Physics 16, 1199–1205 (2020)

    2020

  49. [49]

    : A single space-time is too small

    Pienaar, J. : A single space-time is too small. arXiv:2312.11759 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  50. [50]

    : Is quantum relativism untameable? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science (forthcoming, 2025)

    Riedel, T. : Is quantum relativism untameable? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science (forthcoming, 2025)

    2025

  51. [51]

    : Relational quantum mechanics and relativism

    Riedel, T. : Relational quantum mechanics and relativism. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science A 104, 109–118 (2024)

    2024

  52. [52]

    : Information is physical

    Adlam, E., Rovelli, C. : Information is physical. (2022)

    2022

  53. [53]

    : Parallel lives

    Brassard, G., Raymond-Robichaud, P. : Parallel lives. arXiv:1709.10016 (2020)

    work page arXiv 2020

  54. [54]

    M., Cavalcanti, E

    Wiseman, H. M., Cavalcanti, E. G., Rieffel, E. G. : Thoughtful local friendliness theorem. Quantum 7, 1112 (2023)

    2023

  55. [55]

    : Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Benjamin, 1971)

    d’Espagnat, B. : Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Benjamin, 1971)

    1971

  56. [56]

    : The Quantum Mechanics of Minds and Worlds (Oxford University Press, 1999)

    Barrett, J. : The Quantum Mechanics of Minds and Worlds (Oxford University Press, 1999)

    1999

  57. [57]

    Z., Loewer, B

    Albert, D. Z., Loewer, B. : Interpreting many-worlds. Synthese 77 (1988)

    1988

  58. [58]

    : Does science need intersubjectivity? Synthese 200, 522 (2022)

    Adlam, E. : Does science need intersubjectivity? Synthese 200, 522 (2022)

    2022

  59. [59]

    : Intersubjective agreement unnecessary in QBism

    Elia, G., Carter, J., Crease, R. : Intersubjective agreement unnecessary in QBism. arXiv (2025)

    2025

  60. [60]

    : QBism and relational QM compared

    Pienaar, J. : QBism and relational QM compared. Foundations of Physics 51 (2021)

    2021

  61. [61]

    : Quantum theory and objectivity limits

    Healey, R. : Quantum theory and objectivity limits. Foundations of Physics 48, 1568–1589 (2018). 33

    2018

  62. [62]

    : Can Alice do science and have friends? arXiv:2410.20012 (2024)

    Rovelli, C. : Can Alice do science and have friends? arXiv:2410.20012 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  63. [63]

    : A quintet of quandaries: five no-go theorems for Relational Quantum Mechanics, arXiv: 2107.00670 (2021)

    Pienaar, J. : A quintet of quandaries: five no-go theorems for Relational Quantum Mechanics, arXiv: 2107.00670 (2021)

    work page arXiv 2021

  64. [64]

    Les limites de la connaissance, Odile Jacob (2000)

    Zwirn, H. Les limites de la connaissance, Odile Jacob (2000)

    2000