The Readiness Cut in Quantum Theory: How the Inclination/Ability Distinction Clarifies the Quantum World: 6 The Return of Interference: How Context Shapes Readiness Without Mystery

Interference is often presented as the strangest and most “quantum” of quantum phenomena — the one that most stubbornly resists classical intuition. But under the readiness architecture, interference becomes the clearest thing in the theory.

No wave–particle duality.

No collapse.

No contextual magic.

Just the relational organisation of potential.

To show this, we take the interference phenomenon apart in readiness terms:

inclination–ability–actualisation.

---

1. Inclination: Interference as Internal Cohesion of Morphisms

Interference is not a behaviour.

It is not something “the particle does.”

Interference is the expression of internal structural cohesion in inclination:

• multiple morphisms

• mutually coherent

• jointly shaping a single readiness profile

In other words:

Interference is what inclination looks like when its internal structure is left intact.

It is the internal pattern of potential, not an external pattern of motion.

This is why no particle “goes through two slits.”

What is cohesive is not the particle, but the internal structure of inclination.

---

2. Ability: When Context Removes Morphisms

Ability dictates which morphisms remain admissible in the presence of external constraints.

A which-path detector:

• introduces decohering ability structures

• breaks internal cohesion

• disqualifies entire classes of morphisms

• removes the pattern that generates interference

Not by “disturbing” the particle.

Not by “measuring too hard.”

But because ability has changed the admissible structure of morphisms.

Thus:

Interference disappears because the ability structure no longer permits the morphisms whose coherence expresses interference.

Ability reconfigures potential.

Nothing mystical is happening.

The system is not behaving differently.

The constraints have changed.

---

3. The Classic Puzzle: Why Does Erasing Information Bring Interference Back?

This is the point where many readers expect magic.

But under readiness, there is no magic whatsoever.

Which-path detection introduces an ability structure that enforces exclusivity of paths.

Erasing that information simply removes that ability structure.

The system’s internal inclination was always coherent.

Once the external constraint is removed:

• the excluded morphisms become admissible again

• the inclination’s coherence is once again expressible

• interference reappears

This is not “restoring a lost past.”

Creatures of inclination do not have pasts — only readiness profiles.

It is:

A present reconfiguration of ability that restores the conditions under which inclination’s coherence can express itself.

No paradox.

Just relational readiness.

---

4. Interference Fully Reframed

Interference is not:

• a wave

• a particle doing many things

• a physical oscillation in space

• a mysterious self-interaction

• a collapse-dependent phenomenon

Interference is:

• inclination’s internal coherence,

• expressing itself when

• ability permits the coordinated contribution of multiple morphisms.

That’s it.

This framework makes two further things transparent:

(1) Why interference is ubiquitous at the micro-scale

Micro-scale interactions preserve inclination’s coherence because abilities there are often minimal.

(2) Why interference vanishes at the macro-scale

Macro-scale contexts impose vast numbers of ability constraints, removing the admissibility of coherent morphisms.

This is why decoherence is not an explanation — it is a description.

Readiness explains why decoherence matters:

it reshapes ability in the very dimension that selects which morphisms a system may actualise.

---

5. Actualisation: Why the Result Shows No Interference

When actualisation occurs:

• one morphism is selected

• from the ability-filtered set

• shaped by internal inclination

• and constrained by external context

The event (actualisation) is not an expression of internal coherence.

It is a perspectival cut through readiness.

Thus:

• The readiness profile may include interference,

• but actualisation never “shows” interference.

Interference is a property of potential, not of events.

This dissolves the deepest confusion behind wave–particle duality.

Waves and particles describe event-level behaviour.

Interference describes potential-level structure.

There is no unity between them.

Nothing needs reconciling.

---

6. The Final Insight: Interference = Pure Inclination

We can now state the conceptual payoff:

Interference is inclination in its purest form —

the internal architecture of readiness expressing itself when ability does not constrain it.

Remove the which-path constraint → inclination expresses itself → interference appears.

Restore the constraint → ability suppresses coherence → interference disappears.

There is no paradox because there is no contradiction.

Only the relational structuring of potential.

This completes the explanatory circuit opened in Post 4 and Post 5:

interference, contextuality, delayed choice, entanglement — all fall out of the same simple architecture.

No collapse.

No weirdness.

No quantum special pleading.

Just relational readiness as the grammar of potential.