Interaction-Conditional Semantics and the Dissolution of Quantum Paradoxes

TL;DR

This paper tackles canonical quantum puzzles by identifying a semantic error: attributing interaction-conditional outcomes to intrinsic properties. It proposes interaction-conditional semantics with four explicit principles that ground outcomes in system-configuration relations, while keeping the quantum formalism intact. The core contributions include a formal typing discipline for outcomes ($O(S,C)$), a clear ontology separating Configuration and Structure, and a reinterpretation of Bell and Kochen-Specker results as metalogical constraints rather than dynamical mysteries. The approach yields relational objectivity, dissolves paradoxes across spin, interference, entanglement, and Wigner’s friend, and has practical implications for education and foundational research by reframing what constitutes a meaningful description of quantum phenomena.

Abstract

This paper argues that several canonical puzzles in quantum mechanics, including spin measurement, the double slit, entanglement correlations, and Wigner's friend, share a common origin in a semantic error and the illicit promotion of interaction conditional outcomes to intrinsic properties. I introduce four principles that license only configuration relative predication, grounding outcomes in physical measurement geometry while preserving objectivity. Applying these principles uniformly dissolves each puzzle without new physics or ad hoc interpretive machinery. Bell's theorem and the Kochen-Specker theorem are reframed not as dynamical mysteries but as constraints on permissible explanatory structure, evidence that intrinsic-outcome semantics is incompatible with empirical reality. The result is a relational objectivity that avoids both naive property realism and observer subjectivism.