This article critically analyses the new interdisciplinary synergy between design and quantum mechanics. Going beyond mere metaphorical borrowing at the surface level, it contends that concepts of quantum mechanics, superposition, entanglement, and the observer effect provide a profound epistemological and ontological foundation for redesigning 21st-century design theory and practice.

The critique is organised in three sections:1. a critique of the metaphoric extension of quantum principles to design theory, 2. an examination of the physical, numerical impact of quantum effects on material design, i.e., the production of quantum dots and nanomaterials, and 3. a speculative but critical examination of how quantum logic explodes the very terms of human-centred design (HCD) and necessitates a post-anthropocentric, relational model. Through the integration of the theory of design, science philosophy, and theoretical physics, this article posits that quantum mechanics isn't merely an intellectual exercise but a necessary evolution in addressing holistic, connected global challenges.

Beyond the metaphor

Design as a field has always been a reflection of the dominant scientific paradigms during its time. The Industrial Revolution spawned Newtonian mechanics-based design thinking: deterministic, reductionist, and linear causality. Distinct objects were designed, systems were conceived as an aggregation of their parts, and the designer took on the part of an objective external designer. This worldview, though adequate, is no longer sufficient to address the "wicked problems" of today's globalised world, such as climate change, structural inequality, and digital hyperconnectivity, that are characterised by non-linearity, uncertainty, and deep interconnectedness.

Meanwhile, the twentieth century has witnessed the arrival of quantum mechanics, a core theory of physics describing the physical nature at atomic and subatomic levels. Its principles, wave-particle duality, superposition, entanglement, and observer effects, radically diverge from Newtonian determinism. These concepts have begun seeping into other fields in recent decades, ranging from biology (McFadden & Al-Khalili, 2014) to the science of consciousness (Hameroff & Penrose, 2014). Design cannot be excluded.

This article essentially argues that the confluence of quantum mechanics and design is an epistemological rupture. This convergence occurs on two distinct levels:

  • The material level: the intentional use of quantum effects (i.e., quantum confinement) to generate new materials and technologies with engineered properties, quantitatively reshaping fields from medicine to energy.

  • The conceptual/theoretical level: the use of quantum principles metaphorically and philosophically as an abstraction to challenge and extend current design practice towards a relational, uncertain, and holistic philosophy.

The article engages both levels at a critical distance from unreflective metaphorical uses to promote a disciplined, interdisciplinary debate that has the potential to transform the way we design our world.

Part 1: metaphorical superposition, a critical appraisal

The most common entry point for quantum mechanics into design discourse is metaphorical. Terms like "superposition" (a system in many states at once until measured) and "entanglement" (particles influencing each other instantly across space) are invoked to describe complex, interdependent design issues.

The attraction of the quantum metaphor

Quantum metaphors offer a better lexicon for contemporary experience, its advocates argue. For example, a computer user interface can be conceived to be in a state of superposition: it could contain an infinite number of interactions and routes that only collapse into one experience (a "measurement") when interacted with by the user. Similarly, the global supply chain of a product demonstrates quantum entanglement: a problem in a factory in one part of the world immediately affects retailers, consumers, and designers in other parts of the world, demonstrating an instance of a non-local relationship that cannot be described classically.

This metaphorical approach can be revolutionary. It invites the designer to think in terms of possibilities, probabilities, and non-local causality. It challenges the notion of the designer as a determinate author and replaces it with an image of the designer as an enabler of possibility, creating "probability fields" rather than certain ends (Dunne & Raby, 2013).

The pitfalls of superficial appropriation

But this application is risky. The greatest risk is a shallow "quantum mysticism" which embraces scientific terminology as a general, inspirational slogan with no rigour or experience. Quantum mechanics is mathematically precise and empirically based in its own domain. Transferring its concepts over into the design and social sphere without a filter of critical evaluation will yield conceptual fog and pseudo-science.

There must be a quantitative critical perspective. The mathematical formulations used to model quantum systems, for instance, the Schrödinger equation (iħ ∂ψ/∂t = Ĥ ψ), are deterministic for the wave function but probabilistic for the observables. The probability or chance of finding a particle at some location is given by |ψ|². This quantitative, mathematically expressed definition of probability and uncertainty is light-years away from the loose, colloquial application of "uncertainty" in design practice. Therefore, although the probability metaphor has its place, designers have to be careful not to conflate the stochasticity of user activity with the internal quantum probability of |ψ|².

A properly helpful quantum metaphor would not only steal vocabulary but also become intertwined with the deeper philosophical significance of the theory, such as the shattering of subject-object duality, and lead us to the next necessary concept: the observer effect.

Part 2: the material revolution, quantum phenomena as design medium

Not metaphorically by any means, the most material and quantity-verifiable crossroads of quantum mechanics and design is material science. There, quantum theory is a guidebook, not a metaphor. At the very intersection of quantum & design, by way of the designing of materials whose behaviour is governed by the law of quantum.

Quantum confinement and the engineering of reality

The most dramatised one is the case of the quantum dot (QD). A quantum dot is a nanocrystal of a semiconductor of typical size range 2-10 nanometres. At such a scale, the material acquires quantum mechanical features that are not available in bulk material. This occurs due to the quantum confinement effect.

  • Quantitative foundation: electrons and holes (availability or unavailability of an electron) in bulk semiconductors are free to move. The energy between the conduction and valence bands is a fixed energy known as the band gap (Eg). When a photon of energy greater than Eg hits the material, it will excite a charge carrier and create an electron-hole pair. When the pair recombine, a photon of energy equal to Eg is emitted.

  • Quantum effect: electrons and holes are physically three-dimensionally confined in a quantum dot. Confinement quantises the energy levels, just like an electron confined within an atom. The size-dependent effective band gap (Eg*) relies upon the size. The equation can be approximated as the Brus equation (Brus, 1984):

Eg* ≈ Eg + (h² / (8 R²)) x (1 / me + 1 / mh) - (1.8 e²) / (4 π ε R)

Where:

Eg is the effective quantum dot bandgap.*

Eg is the bulk bandgap.

h is Planck's constant.

R is the radius of the quantum dot.

me and mh are the effective masses of the electron and hole.

e is the charge of an electron.

ε is the dielectric constant of the material.

This equation shows an amazing design principle: light coming from a quantum dot is a simple function of size. Tiny dots emit high-energy blue light; big dots emit low-energy red light. It's a quantitative, deterministic principle out of quantum mechanics.

Design applications and economic impact

This manipulation of material properties at the quantum level has released a plethora of innovation:

  • Display technology (QLED): quantum dots have a wider colour gamut, improved luminance, and higher energy efficiency than traditional LCDs or OLEDs. The market for quantum dots generated USD 10.6 billion in 2023 and is anticipated to expand at a 21.5% CAGR between 2024 and 2030 (Grand View Research, 2024). This expansion is primarily attributed to the engineering of novel optical features in materials by quantum confinement.

  • Biomedical imaging and therapy: quantum dots can be engineered to bind specific cancer cells. Upon excitation, they emit due to fluorescence, providing extremely specific visual contrast. Their emission can be engineered with size, allowing multiplexing, assigning various cell populations resolvable colour QDs simultaneously (Wu et al., 2020). This is the ultimate diagnostic design at the molecular level.

  • Photovoltaics: quantum dots can be "tuned" to absorb specific wavelengths of light, and this makes it theoretically possible for solar cells to absorb a lot more of the solar spectrum and significantly improve efficiency.

Thus, the designer is not simply using a quantum metaphor but actually dealing with quantum principles. This designing is accomplished by computationally simulating wavefunctions and energies in trying to reach an understanding of the behaviour of a material before it has ever existed in the physical world. This is an embodied, literal application of designing with and for superposition and entanglement.

Part 3: entangling practice, quantum principles for a new design ethos

The most radical and speculative aspect of quantum design is not material but method. Quantum theory contradicts the very basic axioms of Newtonianism still informing much of design practice, namely the paradigm of Human-Centred Design (HCD).

The observer effect and the collapse of objectivity

One of the foundations of quantum mechanics is that observation always disturbs the system being observed. The act of measurement of a quantum system (for example, its location or momentum) determines which attribute becomes real. This "observer effect" annihilates the Newtonian ideal of an objective, observation-independent reality waiting to be found.

This has profound implications for design research. Legacy HCD relies on methods like user interviewing and observation to "uncover" user needs, subjecting the user to object study. The quantum perspective would say that the designer is not necessarily always a non-independent observer. Research as a process, the question posed, the methods employed, and the setup context "collapse" the user's potential behaviours into one elicited behaviour. The design researcher cannot be detached from the object of study. Therefore, the intention is not to reveal objective requirements but to facilitate a co-creative process where user and designer collaborate to establish a shared reality (Barad, 2007). This ties into participatory and co-design methods but places them within the strength of philosophical underpinnings.

Non-locality and entanglement: designing for systems

Quantum entanglement demonstrates how particles may be formed into a whole of non-independent parts such that the state of any cannot be defined in terms of defining the state of others, even though they can be distant from one another. This "non-locality" effect is at odds with reductionism.

In design, this law is against creating separate, separated products. Every designed entity exists in a complex matrix of economic, environmental, social, and political systems. The smartphone is linked with mining in the Congo, Chinese factory shop floors, Silicon Valley software systems, and social media consumption everywhere. A good optimised design plan would make the phone easier to hold in the hand (a local advantage). A quantum-inspired practice would be to consider the whole entangled system, to plan for the well-being of the whole network. This would move design to an authentically systemic practice, more like "transition design" (Irwin, 2015), but one founded in the science of assumed inherent interconnectedness. Superposition and Speculative Futures.

Superposition, the notion that many possible states can exist at once, provides a liberating model for future thinking and speculative design.

Rather than design towards one, deterministic future, designers can design things that bring into existence many, superimposed futures. These are "probes" that bring potential futures into being so that society may "measure" them, i.e., react to and discuss them, and thereby wavefunction-collapse to a desired, common result. This is precisely Dunne & Raby's (2013) strategy, for they use design to raise "what if?" questions and make room for argument and debate over the kind of futures we want to build.

Conclusion: towards a quantum design paradigm

The dialogue between quantum mechanics and design is no scholarly luxury. It is an evolutionary necessity, and working with real technological hardware and revolutionary new cosmology is available to experiment with.

In the material realm, quantum mechanics is giving us the quantitative basis for a new era of material design with which to engineer reality at the atomic scale with an unprecedented level of precision. The economic and technological implications of quantum dots are only the opening salvo of a broader revolution in nanotechnology and quantum computing that will redefine the designer's palette.

At a theoretical level, quantum ideas provide us with a tool to dismantle the Newtonian legacy of design. The observer effect asks us to embrace our entanglement with our design objects. Non-locality and entanglement ask us to design for networked, complex systems instead of individual things. Superposition permits us to embrace uncertainty and conjecture on various futures.

The most daunting task is still to guide this convergence with order and precision, avoiding the tempting trap of shallow metaphor and instead embracing the deep, metaphysical horizons of our finest comprehension of the physical universe. Hence, design can go from being a discipline that just creates in terms of to one that treads carefully through and coaxes the dense, interwoven, and probabilistic web of relation that constitutes our world. The quantum leap is not how to design with quantum mechanics, but how to design as if the world were really like the world in quantum mechanics, because at its simplest, it is.

References

Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press.
Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Duke University Press.
Bohm, D. (1980). Wholeness and the implicate order. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Brus, L. E. (1984). Electron-electron and electron-hole interactions in small semiconductor crystallites: The size dependence of the lowest excited electronic state. The Journal of Chemical Physics, 80(9), 4403–4409.
DiSalvo, C. (2012). Adversarial design. The MIT Press.
Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2013). Speculative everything: design, fiction, and social dreaming. The MIT Press.
Escobar, A. (2018). Designs for the pluriverse: Radical interdependence, autonomy, and the making of worlds. Duke University Press.
Feynman, R. P., Leighton, R. B., & Sands, M. (2011). The Feynman lectures on physics, Vol. III: Quantum mechanics. Basic Books. (Original work published 1965).
Fry, T. (2009). Design futuring: sustainability, ethics and new practice. Berg.
Heisenberg, W. (1999). Physics and philosophy: The revolution in modern science. Prometheus Books. (Original work published 1958).
Ingold, T. (2013). Making: Anthropology, archaeology, art and architecture. Routledge.
Irwin, T. (2015). Transition design: A proposal for a new area of design practice, study, and research. Design and Culture, 7(2), 229–246.
Kosso, P. (1998). Appearance and reality: An introduction to the philosophy of physics. Oxford University Press.
Manzini, E. (2015). Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. The MIT Press.
Massumi, B. (2002). Parables for the virtual: movement, affect, and sensation. Duke University Press.
Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realisation of the living. D. Reidel Publishing.
Oxman, N. (2016). Age of entanglement. Journal of Design and Science.
Pallasmaa, J. (2009). The thinking hand: Existential and embodied wisdom in architecture. John Wiley & Sons.
Reddy, S. (2021). Form follows feeling: The neuroaesthetics of design. In A. Chakrabarti & V. Singh (Eds.), Design for tomorrow—Volume 3 (pp. 13-24). Springer Singapore.
Rosenblum, B., & Kuttner, F. (2006). Quantum enigma: Physics encounters consciousness. Oxford University Press.
Suchman, L. A. (2007). Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Willis, A. M. (2006). Ontological designing. Design Philosophy Papers, 4(2), 69–92.
Zeiliger, R. (1999). The virtual and the physical: A phenomenological approach to the study of the digital object. Convergence, 5(2), 34-45.