Allan F. Randall: algorithmic synthetic unity

Algorithmic synthetic unity (or ASU) is not quantum mechanics. It does, however, predict many of the

so-called "mysterious" features of quantum mechanics (including interference and collapse), and does not

contradict quantum mechanics in any way. Moreover, we can make one additional, rationally well-motivated

assumption that will deliver something tantamount to full quantum mechanics. In this form, ASU serves as an

improved interpretation of quantum theory that falls into the "many worlds" or "relative state" category, while

avoiding the major objections to relative state interpretations (in particular, the preferred basis and

probability objections). In addition, ASU makes many claims that go beyond quantum theory, and may even

be falsifiable independently of quantum theory; for instance, it makes certain predictions about the scale of

human cognition as compared to the complexity of the observable universe. As such, it may provide a sketch

of, or at least important pointers to, a successor theory to quantum mechanics.

ASU can, therefore, be viewed as *(1) *a rationalist reconstruction of quantum mechanics (given stronger

assumptions), or *(2) *a toy reconstruction of some of the more puzzling features of quantum mechanics,

(given weaker assumptions), or *(3)* a preliminary proposal for, or sketch of, a possible successor theory to

quantum mechanics.

To read more:

This is an accessible, visual summary of ASU in poster form, presented at the *Quantum [Un]Speakables: 50 *

This is not really a paper, but a brief outline of ASU in just a few pages--essentially a greatly abbreviated

version of the paper below.

A reasonably concise introduction to ASU, viewed as an *a priori* reconstruction of quantum mechanics.

This is a re-worked, and generally tighter, version of Chapter 8 of my dissertation below.

An extensive exploration of all the aspects of ASU. This was my PhD dissertation (York University, Dept. of

Philosophy). It is more complete than the above paper, but the main result in Chapter 8 is not as

well-developed as in the more recent paper.