\n

\nBut quantum mechanics fits perfectly with the dual logic of partitions. There is n o need for (more) bizarre flights of fancy to "interpret" QM. This obj ective indefiniteness approach to QM does not restore our common sense assumption of definiteness down into the quantum realm. But it does r estore sanity and understanding to the whole framework. That is\, we n ow have the logic that precisely fits QM--a logic that was developed i ndependently (i.e.\, without any thought of a QM connection) and that is the unique mathematical dual to ordinary Boolean subset logic\, the logic assumed in classical physics. Moreover the normalized counting measure on partitions gives the quantum-relevant logical information t heory--just as Boole developed logical probabilities as the normalized counting measure on subsets. Indeed\, when the mathematics of partiti on logic and logical information theory is linearized and lifted to co mplex vector spaces\, then it yields the mathematical framework of qua ntum mechanics (but not the specifically physical postulates).

\n< br> \nThe key concepts explicated by this approach are the old ideas o f "objective indefiniteness" (emphasized by Abner Shimony)\, objective probabilities\, and the objective realization of information\, "its" from "dits" (= distinctions). Since partition logic\, logical informat ion theory\, and the lifting program "derives" the mathematics of quan tum mechanics\, it shows how that QM framework can be interpreted--and this set of results gives what might be called