← Back to Home

Collapse is packaging, not a new law

A Six-Birds' Eye View of Quantum Theory: Defining Objects by What We Can Distinguish, Not What We Imagine

Recasts quantum "collapse" as a packaging step: quantum objects become definite when a stable record forms, not through a mysterious new physical law.

Preprint - v1Not peer reviewedPublished Feb 5, 2026Open access DOI pending

Plain-language overview

The paper applies Six Birds Theory to quantum foundations by treating record formation as the key packaging step. When a measurement apparatus creates a stable, irreversible record, the quantum state is compressed into definite outcomes. This compression is idempotent (collapsing twice changes nothing further) and its fixed points are exactly the "classical" states. The paper formalizes this in Lean 4, then tests it with reproducible simulations: dephasing, double-slit interference with quantum eraser, and a full system-apparatus-environment measurement model.

Collapse is a closure, not a new dynamical law.

- Ioannis Tsiokos

At a glance

Collapse is packaging

When a stable record forms, the quantum state is compressed to definite outcomes. Compressing twice changes nothing further. This is what "collapse" is: a closure, not a new physical law.

Context dependence is structural

Different measurement setups define different record bases. These do not commute: measuring spin-z then spin-x gives a different result than the reverse. This is route mismatch, not mystery.

Controlled demonstrations

Double-slit interference, quantum eraser, and full measurement models each isolate a specific aspect of record formation.

Machine-checked core

The key mathematical lemmas (quotient structures and closure properties) are verified in Lean 4.

Core lens

How the paper is structured

A small set of primitives, each with explicit audits and controls.

What is observable

Record interface

A lens specifies which distinctions count as stable records at this descriptive layer. Everything else is "quantum" (not yet definite).

How objects form

Packaging closure

An idempotent compression: apply it once and quantum states become definite records. Apply it again and nothing changes. The fixed points are exactly the classical states.

How to test

Mismatch diagnostics

Different record bases define different compressions. When these do not commute, the mismatch is measurable. This exposes context dependence without invoking extra causation.

Highlighted results

What the paper establishes

Each claim is paired with a control or audit.

Dephasing is perfectly idempotent

Removing off-diagonal quantum coherences in a chosen basis is exactly idempotent. The fixed points are precisely the classical (diagonal) states.

Mismatch depends on measurement basis

When the Hamiltonian is diagonal in the record basis, mismatch is near zero. For a generic (non-aligned) basis, mismatch is large.

Which-path records control interference

In the double-slit model, interference visibility fades continuously as which-path record overlap decreases. A quantum eraser restores fringes by conditioning on retained records.

Cat model separates description layers

The global quantum state can remain nearly pure while the packaged record-level description is a classical mixture. There is no contradiction: "alive" and "dead" are layer-relative.

Methods and reproducibility

How the results are supported

  • Machine-checked proofs (Lean 4) for the quotient, closure, and audit lemmas.
  • Reproducible Python simulations with deterministic seeds and full artifact logs.
  • Controlled quantum and classical examples that isolate the effect of record formation.
  • Systematic sweeps across record bases to map how mismatch varies with measurement context.

Sanity checks

  • - When the Hamiltonian is diagonal in the record basis, mismatch is near zero as expected.
  • - Packaging remains exactly idempotent under any fixed record basis.
  • - Quantum eraser conditioning restores interference fringes only when the which-path record is retained.

Media-ready

Simulation suite

The repository regenerates all figures, mismatch metrics, and record-basis sweeps from configuration files.

- Double-slit interference and quantum eraser simulations

- Full measurement model and Schrodinger cat diagnostics

- Mismatch sweeps across different measurement bases

Regenerate figures from code

Limitations and scope

Read-this-first caveats

  • Status: research preprint, not peer reviewed.
  • Does not derive the Born rule or resolve Bell-type theorems.
  • Results are structural and operational, not claims about what "really exists."
  • All claims are tied to explicitly chosen record interfaces and closures.

Citation

How to cite

Ioannis Tsiokos (2026). A Six-Birds' Eye View of Quantum Theory: Defining Objects by What We Can Distinguish, Not What We Imagine. Preprint.

BibTeX

@misc{tsiokos2026quantum,
  title = {A Six-Birds' Eye View of Quantum Theory: Defining Objects by What We Can Distinguish, Not What We Imagine},
  author = {Tsiokos, Ioannis},
  year = {2026},
  note = {Preprint, DOI pending}
}

Press and contact

Talk to the author

For media inquiries, figures, or walkthroughs of the artifacts, reach out directly.

Ioannis Tsiokos

ioannis@automorph.io

Corresponding author - Press contact

Questions welcome about record formation, the collapse-as-closure view, and measurement-basis mismatch.