Does Quantum Mechanics Need Interpretation?

TL;DR

This paper argues that quantum mechanics inherently requires interpretation because it explains unexplainable correlations and the microscopic structure of classical objects, challenging views that suggest no interpretation is needed.

Contribution

It critically examines the epistemic view and demonstrates that quantum mechanics still necessitates interpretation to address its explanatory functions.

Findings

Quantum mechanics explains unexplainable correlations.

Quantum mechanics accounts for the microscopic structure of classical objects.

Interpretation is essential to answer how the world is for quantum mechanics to be true.

Abstract

Since the beginning, quantum mechanics has raised major foundational and interpretative problems. Foundational research has been an important factor in the development of quantum cryptography, quantum information theory and, perhaps one day, practical quantum computers. Many believe that, in turn, quantum information theory has bearing on foundational research. This is largely related to the so-called epistemic view of quantum states, which maintains that the state vector represents information on a system and has led to the suggestion that quantum theory needs no interpretation. I will argue that this and related approaches fail to take into consideration two different explanatory functions of quantum mechanics, namely that of accounting for classically unexplainable correlations between classical phenomena and that of explaining the microscopic structure of classical objects. If interpreting quantum mechanics means answering the question, "How can the world be for quantum mechanics to be true?", there seems to be no way around it.