The International Journal of Quantum Foundations (IJQF) is a quarterly, peer-reviewed, open-access online journal dedicated to advancing research and discourse in the conceptual and mathematical foundations of quantum theories. Launched in January 2015, IJQF serves as a problem-oriented and debate-encouraged platform for researchers exploring the fundamental principles of quantum mechanics, quantum field theory, and quantum gravity. The journal aims to address long-standing and controversial issues in quantum foundations by fostering rigorous academic discussion and publishing high-quality contributions from physicists, mathematicians, and philosophers of physics. Accessible at https://www.ijqf.org/, IJQF is distinguished by its commitment to open access, low article processing charges, and a prestigious editorial board comprising internationally recognized experts in the field.
Mission and Scope
IJQF’s primary mission is to provide a convenient and dynamic online forum for researchers to debate, refine, and resolve foundational questions in quantum theory. The journal emphasizes conceptual clarity and mathematical rigor, encouraging contributions that challenge conventional perspectives and propose innovative ideas. Its scope encompasses all aspects of quantum foundations, including but not limited to:
- Conceptual foundations of quantum mechanics, such as interpretations of the quantum state, entanglement, wave-particle duality, nonlocality, and contextuality.
- Mathematical frameworks underpinning quantum mechanics, quantum field theory, and quantum gravity.
- Philosophical implications of quantum theory and its intersections with epistemology, ontology, and the philosophy of science.
- Novel approaches to resolving the measurement problem, Bell’s theorem, and other foundational paradoxes.
- Connections between quantum foundations and emerging fields like quantum information science and quantum computing.
Unlike traditional journals, IJQF encourages speculative and debate-driven content through its supplement, Quantum Speculations, launched in August 2019, which publishes original and thought-provoking ideas in modern physics to stimulate discussion among experts.
Editorial Board and Contributors
The journal boasts a distinguished editorial board, including luminaries such as Lajos Diósi, Arthur Fine, Gordon N. Fleming, Olival Freire Jr., Sheldon Goldstein, Robert Griffiths, Hans Halvorson, Richard Healey, Basil Hiley, Don Howard, Peter Lewis, Roger Penrose (2020 Nobel laureate in Physics), and Maximilian Schlosshauer. This diverse and highly qualified board ensures that IJQF maintains a high standard of scholarly rigor while fostering interdisciplinary dialogue between physics, mathematics, and philosophy. The peer-review process is thorough, ensuring that all published works meet the journal’s standards for originality, clarity, and intellectual depth.
The issues of IJQF, starting in January 2015, featured contributions from prominent physicists and philosophers, including Nicolas Gisin, Lee Smolin, John D. Norton, Huw Price, and David Wallace, among others. These contributions helped establish IJQF as a leading platform for cutting-edge discussions in quantum foundations, setting the tone for its interdisciplinary approach and commitment to addressing fundamental questions.
In addition, IJQF is supported by a group of premier members, distinguished researchers who contribute to the journal’s mission through their expertise and involvement. Notable premier members include Steven Adler, Yakir Aharonov, Tony Leggett, Tim Maudlin, N. David Mermin, Henry Stapp, Lev Vaidman, and others. These premier members, drawn from prestigious institutions worldwide, enhance IJQF’s reputation as a hub for groundbreaking research in quantum foundations.
Publication Types and Features
IJQF publishes a variety of content to cater to its diverse readership, including:
- Normal Papers and Reviews: Comprehensive research articles and reviews that provide in-depth analysis of quantum foundational topics.
- Research Notes: Shorter contributions that present preliminary findings or novel insights.
- Discussion Notes: Pieces designed to spark debate and encourage critical engagement with controversial topics.
- Reminiscences: Reflective articles that explore the historical and personal dimensions of quantum foundations research.
- Book Reviews: Since 2019, IJQF has prioritized substantive and high-quality reviews of new books in quantum foundations, offering extensive coverage and opportunities for authors to respond to reviewers in a dedicated discussion section.
The journal’s open-access model ensures that all content is freely available worldwide under a Creative Commons CC BY license, requiring no special permission for reuse provided proper citation is given. This accessibility, combined with a low article processing charge, makes IJQF an inclusive platform for researchers globally.
Notable Initiatives and Content
IJQF stands out for its innovative initiatives, such as the Quantum Speculations supplement, which focuses on speculative ideas in quantum physics and encourages bold, creative proposals. Additionally, the journal has organized events like the 2019 International Workshop, “Beyond Bell’s Theorem,” held online from August 1 to September 1, 2019, which brought together leading experts to discuss foundational issues in quantum mechanics.
Recent publications in IJQF reflect its commitment to cutting-edge research. For example, articles published in 2024 and 2025 cover topics such as quantum measurement without collapse, relativistic thermodynamics, and spacetime-symmetric extensions of quantum mechanics. Authors like M. Baldo, David C. Lush, Patrice Mélinon, Constantin Meis, Michael Silberstein, W. M. Stuckey, and Li Hua Yu have contributed to the journal’s growing repository of influential works. Notably, the paper On Testing the Simulation Theory by Tom Campbell, Houman Owhadi, Joe Sauvageau, and David Watkinson from California Institute of Technology has garnered significant attention, amassing over 20,000 views, highlighting the journal’s impact in sparking widespread interest in novel ideas.
Impact and Community Engagement
IJQF actively engages its community through its website, which features a weekly-updated feed of the latest papers on quantum foundations from various sources, including arXiv.org, Foundations of Physics, and Physical Review Letters. This feed, powered by Feed on Feeds, ensures that researchers stay informed about developments across the field. The journal also encourages reader interaction through comments (requiring login and real names for civility) and fosters a collaborative environment for discussing complex ideas.
Since its inception, IJQF has garnered significant attention, with thousands of views for reviews like Foundations of Quantum Mechanics: An Exploration of the Physical Meaning of Quantum Theory and high-impact papers like On Testing the Simulation Theory. Its commitment to bridging physics and philosophy has resonated with a new generation of researchers, reflecting a broader trend of renewed interest in foundational questions, as noted by contributors who highlight the historical shift away from and back toward philosophy in quantum mechanics.
Why Publish in IJQF?
The International Journal of Quantum Foundations offers several compelling reasons for researchers to choose it as a platform for publishing their work in quantum foundations, as outlined on the journal’s website (https://ijqf.org/why-publish-in-ijqf). These include:
- First Dedicated Journal: IJQF is the first journal exclusively dedicated to the foundations of quantum theory, providing a specialized venue for researchers to explore and debate critical issues in quantum mechanics, quantum field theory, and quantum gravity.
- Open Access: All content is freely accessible worldwide under a Creative Commons CC BY license, ensuring broad dissemination and impact without barriers to readership.
- Low Article Processing Charge: IJQF maintains a low publication fee, making it an affordable option for researchers globally, particularly those without extensive funding.
- Rapid Review and Publication: IJQF offers a streamlined peer-review process, typically completing review and publication within one month from submission, enabling researchers to share their findings quickly and efficiently.
- Debate-Encouraged Forum: The journal actively encourages debate on controversial issues, fostering a dynamic environment where researchers can engage with diverse perspectives and refine their ideas.
- Highly Qualified Editorial Board: With an editorial board comprising internationally recognized experts, IJQF ensures rigorous peer review and high scholarly standards, enhancing the credibility of published work.
- Online Manuscript Submission: The fully online submission process is convenient and efficient, streamlining the publication process for authors.
These features make IJQF an ideal platform for researchers seeking to contribute to the advancement of quantum foundations while reaching a global audience through an accessible and prestigious journal.
Conclusion
The International Journal of Quantum Foundations is a pioneering platform that has redefined scholarly discourse in quantum foundations since its launch in 2015. By combining open-access publishing, a distinguished editorial board, and a commitment to fostering debate, IJQF serves as a vital resource for researchers seeking to unravel the mysteries of quantum theory. Its inclusive publication types, speculative supplement, and active engagement with the global research community, supported by its premier members, make it an essential hub for advancing the conceptual and mathematical understanding of quantum mechanics, quantum field theory, and quantum gravity. For researchers, students, and enthusiasts alike, IJQF offers a unique space to explore the profound questions at the heart of modern physics.
Rovelli is correct that psi-ontology versus psi-epistemology is at the heart of the confusion about quantum theory. Psi-ontology has to deal with the measurement problem and collapse of the wave function, as Rovelli points out, while psi-epistemology leaves us asking, “Knowledge ABOUT WHAT?” Likewise, quantum information theory per Griffiths’ post leaves us asking, “Information ABOUT WHAT?” Leifer writes, “If we are to maintain psi-epistemic explanations, then we instead need to look for retrocausal ontological models that posit a deeper reality underlying quantum theory that does not include the quantum state.” Along these lines, Price, Spekkens and Corry have each introduced toy models and we have recently posted a full-fledged model here https://ijqf.org/archives/2087. Since the problem has resisted decades of intense study by very intelligent scholars, we are going to have to seriously consider more radical approaches than have thus far received attention in the foundations community. So, in summary, the biggest problem facing quantum foundations is an unwillingness to venture outside a comfort zone.
I agree that we have to go outside our comfort zone, but I respectfully disagree that psi-epistemic models constitute the correct sacrifice of our comfort. The possibilist transactional interpretation or PTI is a psi-ontic model that calls on us to sacrifice our tenaciously held and yet unexamined assumption that all of reality must be encompassed by spacetime. As I’ve argued in the literature and in my CUP book, the most natural and uncluttered approach to solving the riddles of QM is to simply admit that it’s describing sub-empirical, extra-spatiotemporal processes. No new formal structures (hidden variables) are required for this account.
I have argued in the literature that PTI solves the measurement problem by giving a rigorous physical account of what constitutes ‘measurement’–i.e., it provides a physical referent for von Neumann’s ‘Process 1’ transition from a pure to a mixed state. Then ‘collapse’ is the process (via a form of spontaneous symmetry breaking) by which spacetime events are created; that is why collapse is not a spacetime process, and why it defies a causal, mechanistic explanation. (In that aspect, PTI agrees with RBW that there is fundamental acausality at the root of the quantum-to-classical transition.)
Remember that Bohr himself said that quantum process “[transcend] the frame of space and time” (Jammer 1993, 189). That doesn’t mean they aren’t real. They are just not spacetime processes. Of course, Bohr assumed that we could not or should not talk about things that are not in spacetime. But why not? Heisenberg also proposed ‘potentia’.
Is the idea that one could actually give a physically grounded, observer-independent solution to the measurement problem considered suspect because it has resisted solution for so long? That would be a shame. All one needs to do is take seriously the idea that absorption is a real physical process (i.e. the direct-action picture of fields). And absorption is not a primitive notion in PTI; it is rigorously defined at the relativistic level. (An extra dividend of the direct-action approach is a solution to the problem of Haag’s Thm, see my recent paper in the 2nd issue of IJQF.)
PTI certainly qualifies as “outside our comfort zone!” I did not mean to imply otherwise. [RBW is itself a form of direct action, so we took the liberty of referencing your IJQF paper for that in https://ijqf.org/archives/2087.%5D Have you yet extrapolated PTI’s implications for physics? I would like to see a PTI approach to quantum gravity, for example.
Bohm’s original pilot-wave theory from around 1953 really does away with all the confusion surrounding collapse, the cut etc of Bohr’s Copenhagen interpretations and its spin-offs including John Cramer’s TI with “actualization” replacing “collapse”.
Bohm’s version is completely ontological. Antony Valentini has one strategy for getting beyond the Born probability rule to the new post-quantum realm of signaling entanglement. Rod Sutherland has also applied what is essentially Yakir Aharonov’s “weak measurement” using Wheeler-Feynman inspired advanced and retarded quantum information fields to get a retro-causal version of Bohm’s pilot wave – particle duality completely consistent with the global Lorentz group symmetry of special relativity. There is no need for a preferred frame of reference hidden by the statistical noise inherent in the Born rule. In other words, Abner Shimony’s “passion at a distance” need no longer be invoked. We do not even need to think of configuration space for entangled quantum systems as anything more than a convenient short-hand tool – not as a fundamental ontological structure.
Some references to what I alluded to above:
https://www.academia.edu/12876280/V7_Updated_June_13_2015_Retrocausal_Back-Reaction_Post-Quantum_Entanglement_Signaling
https://www.academia.edu/12967176/References_and_post-script_for_post-quantum_entanglement_signaling
http://arxiv.org/abs/1408.2836
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0203049
Antony Valentini http://arxiv.org/find/hep-th/1/au:+Valentini_A/0/1/0/all/0/1
arXiv:1502.02058 [pdf]
Naive Quantum Gravity
Roderick I. Sutherland
Subjects: General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology (gr-qc); Quantum Physics (quant-ph)
arXiv:1411.3762 [pdf]
Lagrangian Formulation for Particle Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics
Roderick I. Sutherland
Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph)
arXiv:quant-ph/0601095 [pdf]
Causally Symmetric Bohm Model
Rod Sutherland
Comments: 35 pages, 5 figures, new sections 12 and 13 added
Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph)
Free Will and Retrocausality in the Quantum World http://prce.hu/centre_for_time/jtf/retro.html
For the 2018 Workshop, I would like to discuss the Relativistic Transactional Interpretation, specifically the explicit derivation of the Born Rule for radiative processes as presented in my recent paper with John Cramer (https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.04501).
It appears clear that TI and RTI provide a physical account of measurement as well as a physical derivation of the Born Rule. Previous objections to TI (such as that of Maudlin) have been unambiguously resolved and/or nullified (e.g., https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.04609). Thus, TI is still perfectly viable and provides long-sought solutions to pressing problems in quantum theory regarding the need for a physically grounded definition of ‘measurement’ and the source of the Born Rule (as well as a solution to the consistency problems for QFT as reflected in Haag’s theorem, https://ijqf.org/archives/2004). Curiously, however, TI is still not generally recognized as among the ‘mainstream’ approaches. I look forward to discussing with other IJQF members why that might be. Is it the apparent “action at a distance” of the direct-action theory that is off-putting? Is it because both Wheeler and Feynman abandoned their theory (though Wheeler was later advocating it again in 2003)? Comments welcome.