Event-Probability Interpretation


Gunn Quznetsov

The Event-Probability Interpretation of quantum mechanics is an updated version of the Copenhagen interpretation. Unlike the Copenhagen interpretation, which assumes the continuous existence of elementary particles, this interpretation considers such particles to be ensembles of their related dot events connected by probabilities. The Event-Probability Interpretation (EPI)[1] is a development of attempts by H. Bergson[2], A. N. Whithead[3], M. Čapek[4][5], E. C. Whipple Jr.[6], and J. Jeans[7] to interpret elementary physical particles as events. The experimental basis for EPI is the Double-Slit Experiment. Theoretical substantiation of EPI is given by Gunn Quznetsov's works,[8][9] which prove that the concepts and statements of the Quantum Theory are equivalent to the concepts and statements of the probability of dot events and their ensembles.

Elementary physical particles in vacuum behave in accord with these probabilities. For example[10] , in accordance with the Double-slit experiment, if a partition with two slits is placed between a source of elementary particles and a detecting screen in vacuum, then interference occurs. But if this system is instead put into a cloud chamber, then the trajectories of the particles will be clearly marked with drops of condensate and any interference will disappear. It seems that any physical particle exists only in those short periods of time when some event occurs to it. And in the other periods of time the particle does not exist, but the probability for some event to occur to this particle remains.

Thus, if no event occurs between an event of creation of a particle and an event of detection of it, then the particle does not exist during this period of time. There exists only the probability of detection of this particle at some point. But this probability obeys the equations of quantum theory, and we get interference. But in a cloud chamber events of condensation form a chain that traces the trajectory of this particle. In this case the interference disappears. But this trajectory is not continuous—each two points of this line are separated by a gap. The observed movement of this particle arises from the fact that a wave of probability propagates between these points.

Consequently, the elementary physical particle represents an ensemble of dot events associated with probabilities. Charge, mass, energy, momentum, spins, etc. as they would be seen when the particle is actually observed, are governed by the distribution parameters of the probabilities pertinent thereto. It explains all paradoxes of quantum physics. Schrödinger's cat lives easily without any superposition of states until the microevent awaited by everyone occurs. Moreover, the wave function disappears without any collapse in the moment when event probability disappears as the event occurs.

Hence, entanglement concerns not particles but probabilities. That is, when the event of the measuring of spin of Alice's electron occurs, then the probability for these entangled electrons is changed instantly throughout all space. Therefore, nonlocality applies to probabilities but not to particles. Probabilities cannot transmit any information.


  1. Gunn Quznetsov, Quantum Theory Event-Probability Interpretation, in Advances in Quantum Theory, ed. G. Joeger, A. Khrennikov, M. Schlosshauer, G. Weihs, AIP Conf. Proc. 1327, Melville, NY, 2011, pp.460--465
  2. H. Bergson, Creative Evolution, Greenwood press, Wesport, Conn, 1975.
  3. A. N. Whitehead, The Concept of Nature. Cambridge Uni. Press, 1920..
  4. M. Čapek, The Philosophical Impact of Contemporary Physics, D. Van Nostrand, Princeton, N.J., 1961.
  5. M. Čapek, “Particles or events,” in Physical Sciences and History of Physics, edited by R. S. Cohen, and M. W. Wartorsky, Reidel, Boston, Mass., 1984, p. 1.
  6. E. C. Whipple jr., Nuovo Cimento A 92, 11 (1986).
  7. J. Jeans, The New Background of Science, Macmillan, N. Y., 1933.
  8. G. Quznetsov, Progress in Physics, v.2, 2009, pp. 96--106
  9. G. Quznetsov, Progress in Physics, v.1, 2011, pp. 98--100.
  10. G. Quznetsov, Probabilistic Treatment of Gauge Theories, Nova Sci. Publ., NY, 2007, pp.50-60