# On the thermodynamical cost of some interpretations of quantum theory

## TL;DR

This paper challenges a claim that certain quantum interpretations can be empirically distinguished by their heat costs, showing that the original conclusion results from a misinterpretation of system boundaries.

## Contribution

It provides a counterexample and clarifies the importance of system-agent distinction, reaffirming the viability of the quantum interpretations.

## Key findings

- Counterexample refutes the heat cost distinction claim
- Heat costs are attributable to external agents, not the quantum system
- Clarifies the role of system-agent boundaries in thermodynamic analyses

## Abstract

Cabello et al. claim to have proven the existence of an empirically verifiable difference between two broad classes of quantum interpretations. On the basis of three seemingly uncontentious assumptions, (i) the possibility of randomly selected measurements, (ii) the finiteness of a quantum system's memory, and (iii) the validity of Landauer's principle, and further, by applying computational mechanics to quantum processes, the authors arrive at the conclusion that some quantum interpretations (including central realist interpretations) are associated with an excess heat cost and are thereby untenable - or at least - that they can be distinguished empirically from their competitors by measuring the heat produced. Here, we provide an explicit counterexample to this claim and demonstrate that their surprising result can be traced back to a lack of distinction between system and external agent. By drawing the distinction carefully, we show that the resulting heat cost is fully accounted for in the external agent, thereby restoring the tenability of the quantum interpretations in question.