Is Relational Quantum Mechanics about Facts? If So, Whose? A Reply to Di Biagio and Rovelli's Comment on Brukner and Pienaar

TL;DR

This paper discusses critiques of Rovelli's Relational Quantum Mechanics, clarifying points raised by Di Biagio and Rovelli's reply, and examines the concept of facts within this interpretation.

Contribution

The paper provides a detailed analysis of the debate on facts in Relational Quantum Mechanics and clarifies misunderstandings in the recent commentaries.

Findings

Identifies ambiguities in the concept of facts in RQM

Clarifies the positions of Di Biagio and Rovelli

Highlights the need for clearer definitions in RQM discussions

Abstract

Brukner and Pienaar have critiqued the Relational Quantum Mechanics of Rovelli, and together with Di Biagio, the latter has replied. I point out a few places where, in my view, that reply needs clarification.