Jacob A. Barandes (2023), Philosophy of Physics 3(1):8 (2025); arXiv preprint first — ARXIV-2302.10778
Key takeaways
- Every quantum system can be represented as an “indivisible” (non-Markovian) stochastic process on an ordinary configuration space, and the reverse also holds. On that reading the wave function is a derived mathematical tool, like a Lagrangian, and not part of the ontology.
Seeded from the abstract and a skim, before the reading in NOTE-080. What follows is what the work says about itself.
The paper claims an exact correspondence between quantum theory and a class of stochastic processes it calls indivisible. These processes unfold in a classical configuration space under ordinary probability, but their transition maps cannot in general be factored through intermediate times. On this view the wave function is a secondary representational device, not a primary ontological ingredient. Interference, decoherence, entanglement, noncommuting observables and collapse then receive deflationary explanations. Practically, the correspondence gives a new reconstruction of quantum theory alongside the Hilbert-space, path-integral and quasiprobability ones. It also lets Hilbert-space methods be used for generic non-Markovian stochastic dynamics in other sciences.
Standing in the record
Filed from the survey of 2026-09-25 of work the anthology set aside as out of scope (tier C): 535 seconds of active reading over 4 sessions in the papers-feed tracker. It was filed Deferred, unread. NOTE-080 is the close reading of 2026-09-25, and it placed the work: Active — the clearest single statement of the indivisible-stochastic-process reading of quantum theory, and its measurement model (§4) is worth reading. Discount its “new result” labels: the dictionary is an identity, the Schrödinger equation is the definition of H, and unitarity is a representational choice the paper’s own gauge footnote does not preserve.
When seeded, before the reading in NOTE-080, the entry gave a priority for a deeper reading: medium — The owner has spent moderate time on it (t=535, n=4) and it is a load-bearing reconstruction for the cluster. The skim captures the dictionary, but the ontological claims need the §4–5 argument read in full.
What the seeding asked a deeper reading to check (NOTE-080 is that reading):
- It offers a bridge from non-Markovian stochastic modelling to Hilbert-space and linear-algebra methods. §5.4 explicitly suggests applying it to phenomenological processes in biology and finance, which touches sequence and time-series modelling.
- Check what the reconstruction adds beyond a re-encoding. How much freedom does the non-uniqueness of Θ leave, and does anything select unitary Θ other than a stipulation?
- Locality and causation are deferred (§5.4). Any claim about Bell nonlocality should be checked against the follow-up papers, including arXiv:2507.21192.
Access when seeded: arXiv abs page (v1 20 Feb 2023, v2 7 Sep 2023, v3 30 Jul 2025) and full PDF of v3 (38 pp., the accepted version) read directly: section structure, §2.1–2.2, §3.1, §3.7 and §5. Crossref confirms Philosophy of Physics 3(1), article 8 (issued 2025). arXiv says v3 moved some material into arXiv:2507.21192, which I did not read.