Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1409.3131 · Journal of Physics Conference Series

A subquantum arrow of time

Theo M. Nieuwenhuizen

Published Apr 14, 2014• 3 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The outcome of a single quantum experiment is unpredictable, except in a pure-state limit. The definite process that takes place in the apparatus may either be intrinsically random or be explainable from a deeper theory. While the first scenario is the standard lore, the latter implies that quantum mechanics is emergent. In that case, it is likely that one has to reconsider radiation by accelerated charges as a physical effect, which thus must be compensated by an energy input. Stochastic electrodynamics, for example, asserts that the vacuum energy arises from classical fluctuations with energy 1/2 ℏω per mode. In such theories the stability of the hydrogen ground state will arise from energy input from fluctuations and output by radiation, hence due to an energy throughput. That flux of energy constitutes an arrow of time, which we call the "subquantum arrow of time". It is related to the stability of matter and it is more fundamental than, e.g., the thermodynamic and cosmological arrows.

DOI
10.1088/1742-6596/504/1/012008

Related papers

Quantum-Entropy Physics

Davi Geiger, Zvi M. Kedem

All the laws of physics are time-reversible. Time arrow emerges only when ensembles of classical particles are treated probabilistically, outside of physics laws, and the entropy and the second law of thermodynamics are introduced. In quantum physics, no mechanism for a time arrow has been proposed despite its intrinsic probabilistic nature. In consequence, one cannot explain why an electron in an excited state will "spontaneously" transition into a ground state as a photon is created and emitted, instead of continuing in its reversible unitary evolution. To address such phenomena, we introduce an entropy for quantum physics, which will conduce to the emergence of a time arrow. The entropy is a measure of randomness over the degrees of freedom of a quantum state. It is dimensionless; it is a relativistic scalar, it is invariant under coordinate transformation of position and momentum that maintain conjugate properties and under CPT transformations; and its minimum is positive due to the uncertainty principle. To excogitate why some quantum physical processes cannot take place even though they obey conservation laws, we partition the set of all evolutions of an initial state into four blocks, based on whether the entropy is (i) increasing but not a constant, (ii) decreasing but not a constant, (iii) a constant, (iv) oscillating. We propose a law that in quantum physics entropy (weakly) increases over time. Thus, evolutions in the set (ii) are disallowed, and evolutions in set (iv) are barred from completing an oscillation period by instantaneously transitioning to a new state. This law for quantum physics limits physical scenarios beyond conservation laws, providing causality reasoning by defining a time arrow.

arXiv:2103.07996•Mar 14, 2021•2 citations

The Universal Arrow of Time is a Key for the Solution of the Basic Physical Paradoxes

Oleg Kupervasser

The modern classical statistical physics, thermodynamics, quantum mechanics and gravity theory are developed and well-known theories. The described theories are developed and well studied for a long time. Nevertheless, it contains a number of paradoxes. It forces many scientists to doubt internal consistency of these theories. However, the given paradoxes can be resolved within the framework of the existing physics, without introduction of new laws. Further, in this paper we discuss the paradoxes underlying classical statistical physics, thermodynamics, quantum mechanics, and non-quantum and quantum gravities. We suggest the approaches to solution of these paradoxes on basis universal arrow of time. The first one relies on the influence of the external observer (environment), which disrupts the correlations in the system and results in time arrows alignment. The basis of the second one is the limits of self-knowledge of the system in case of the observed system; the external observer and the environment are included in the considered system. We introduce the concepts of observable dynamics, ideal dynamics, and unpredictable dynamics. We contemplate the phenomenon of complex (living) systems from the point of view of these dynamics. Perspectives of practical use of Unpredictable systems for artificial intellect are considered. c Chapter 1. The Universal Arrow of Time: Classical Mechanics. Abstract: Solution of paradox for the entropy increase in reversible systems. Statistical physics cannot explain why the thermodynamic time arrow does exist un- less very special and so it postulates unnatural initial conditions. However, we are ready to state that statistical physics is able to explain why the thermodynamic time arrow is

•Jan 1, 2013•8 citations

Time, the Arrow of Time, and Quantum Mechanics

Gerard ’t Hooft

It is brought forward that viable theories of the physical world that have no variable at all that can play the role of time, do not exist; some notion of time is one of the very first ingredients a candidate theory should possess. Almost by definition, time has an arrow. In contrast, time reversibility, or even the possibility to run the equations of motion backwards in time, is not at all a primary requirement. This means that the direction of the arrow of time may well be uniquely defined in the theory, even locally. It is explained that a rigorous definition of time, as well as a formulation of the causality and locality concepts, can only be given when one has a model for the physical phenomena described. The only viable causality condition is one that is symmetric under time reversal. We explain these statements in terms of the author’s favoured deterministic cellular automaton interpretation of quantum mechanics, also to be referred to as 'vector space analysis', and expand on these ideas. It is also summarised how our more rigorous causality condition affects Bell’s theorems. What distinguishes quantum systems from classical ones is our fundamental inability to control the microscopic details of the initial state when phenomena are studied in the light of some theoretical model.

arXiv:1804.01383•Frontiers in Physics•Aug 29, 2018•53 citations

The Universal Arrow of Time II: Quantum mechanics case

Oleg Kupervasser

This paper is a natural continuation of our previous paper arXiv:1011.4173 . We illustrated earlier that in classical Hamilton mechanics, for overwhelming majority of real chaotic macroscopic systems, alignment of their thermodynamic time arrows occurs because of their low interaction. This fact and impossibility to observe entropy decrease at introspection explain the second law of thermodynamics. The situation in quantum mechanics is even a little bit easier: all closed systems of finite volume are periodic or nearly periodic. The proof in quantum mechanics is in many respects similar to the proof in classical Hamilton mechanics - it also uses small interaction between subsystems and impossibility to observe entropy decrease at introspection. However, there are special cases which were not found in the classical mechanics. In these cases one microstate corresponds to a set of possible macrostates (more precisely, their quantum superposition). Consideration of this property with use of decoherence theory and taking into account thermodynamic time arrows will introduce new outcomes in quantum mechanics. It allows to resolve basic paradoxes of quantum mechanics: (a) to explain the paradox of wave packet reduction at measurements when an observer is included in the system (introspection) (paradox of the Schrodinger cat); (b) to explain unobservability of superposition of macroscopic states by an external observer in real experiments (paradox of Wigner's friend); (c) to prove full equivalence of multi-world and Copenhagen interpretations of quantum mechanics; (d) to explain deviations from the exponential law at decay of particles and pass from one energy level to another (paradox of a kettle which will never begin to boil).

arXiv:1106.6160•Jun 30, 2011•3 citations

Quantum Measurement and Classical Emergence from Vacuum Coherence in rCVGT

Steen Møller Nielsen

The quantum measurement problem remains one of the most profound unresolved issues in fundamental physics. While quantum mechanics delivers extraordinarily precise statistical predictions, it does not specify a physical mechanism by which definite classical outcomes arise from quantum superpositions. Decoherence theory accounts for the suppression of interference but does not explain outcome selection or the stability of classical reality. This paper investigates quantum measurement within the framework of Relativistic Coherent Vacuum Gravity Theory (rCVGT). In rCVGT, the vacuum is modeled as a structured relativistic medium characterized by a coherence order parameter ψ(x), a coherence magnitude Q(x) = |ψ(x)|², a vacuum-flow four-field u^μ(x), and a physical time-rate field τ(x). We propose that quantum measurement corresponds to a dynamical instability of vacuum coherence induced by macroscopic coupling to matter and radiation. Classical outcomes emerge when local vacuum coherence is driven below a critical stability threshold, resulting in an irreversible reconfiguration of the vacuum state. The collapse timescale is determined by the vacuum-coherence self-energy defined within rCVGT. This mechanism simultaneously provides a physical foundation for classicality, irreversibility, and the arrow of time. The framework preserves the formal structure and empirical predictions of quantum mechanics while offering a unified physical explanation of measurement grounded in relativistic vacuum dynamics.

•Feb 27, 2026•0 citations

Quantum causality determines the arrow of time

John F. Donoghue, Gabriel Menezes

In the philosophy of science, the origin of an arrow of time is viewed as problematic. We describe here how this arrow really follows from the causal structure of quantum physics. This connection is not really new -- it is just overlooked in most discussions of the arrow of time.

arXiv:2003.09047•Mar 19, 2020•1 citation
The outcome of a single quantum experiment is unpredictable, except in a pure-state limit. The definite process that takes place in the apparatus may either be intrinsically random or be explainable from a deeper theory. While the first scenario is the standard lore, the latter implies that quantum mechanics is emergent. In that case, it is likely that one has to reconsider radiation by accelerated charges as a physical effect, which thus must be compensated by an energy input. Stochastic electrodynamics, for example, asserts that the vacuum energy arises from classical fluctuations with energy 1/2 ℏω per mode. In such theories the stability of the hydrogen ground state will arise from energy input from fluctuations and output by radiation, hence due to an energy throughput. That flux of energy constitutes an arrow of time, which we call the "subquantum arrow of time". It is related to the stability of matter and it is more fundamental than, e.g., the thermodynamic and cosmological arrows.
All the laws of physics are time-reversible. Time arrow emerges only when ensembles of classical particles are treated probabilistically, outside of physics laws, and the entropy and the second law of thermodynamics are introduced. In quantum physics, no mechanism for a time arrow has been proposed despite its intrinsic probabilistic nature. In consequence, one cannot explain why an electron in an excited state will "spontaneously" transition into a ground state as a photon is created and emitted, instead of continuing in its reversible unitary evolution. To address such phenomena, we introduce an entropy for quantum physics, which will conduce to the emergence of a time arrow. The entropy is a measure of randomness over the degrees of freedom of a quantum state. It is dimensionless; it is a relativistic scalar, it is invariant under coordinate transformation of position and momentum that maintain conjugate properties and under CPT transformations; and its minimum is positive due to the uncertainty principle. To excogitate why some quantum physical processes cannot take place even though they obey conservation laws, we partition the set of all evolutions of an initial state into four blocks, based on whether the entropy is (i) increasing but not a constant, (ii) decreasing but not a constant, (iii) a constant, (iv) oscillating. We propose a law that in quantum physics entropy (weakly) increases over time. Thus, evolutions in the set (ii) are disallowed, and evolutions in set (iv) are barred from completing an oscillation period by instantaneously transitioning to a new state. This law for quantum physics limits physical scenarios beyond conservation laws, providing causality reasoning by defining a time arrow.
The modern classical statistical physics, thermodynamics, quantum mechanics and gravity theory are developed and well-known theories. The described theories are developed and well studied for a long time. Nevertheless, it contains a number of paradoxes. It forces many scientists to doubt internal consistency of these theories. However, the given paradoxes can be resolved within the framework of the existing physics, without introduction of new laws. Further, in this paper we discuss the paradoxes underlying classical statistical physics, thermodynamics, quantum mechanics, and non-quantum and quantum gravities. We suggest the approaches to solution of these paradoxes on basis universal arrow of time. The first one relies on the influence of the external observer (environment), which disrupts the correlations in the system and results in time arrows alignment. The basis of the second one is the limits of self-knowledge of the system in case of the observed system; the external observer and the environment are included in the considered system. We introduce the concepts of observable dynamics, ideal dynamics, and unpredictable dynamics. We contemplate the phenomenon of complex (living) systems from the point of view of these dynamics. Perspectives of practical use of Unpredictable systems for artificial intellect are considered. c Chapter 1. The Universal Arrow of Time: Classical Mechanics. Abstract: Solution of paradox for the entropy increase in reversible systems. Statistical physics cannot explain why the thermodynamic time arrow does exist un- less very special and so it postulates unnatural initial conditions. However, we are ready to state that statistical physics is able to explain why the thermodynamic time arrow is
It is brought forward that viable theories of the physical world that have no variable at all that can play the role of time, do not exist; some notion of time is one of the very first ingredients a candidate theory should possess. Almost by definition, time has an arrow. In contrast, time reversibility, or even the possibility to run the equations of motion backwards in time, is not at all a primary requirement. This means that the direction of the arrow of time may well be uniquely defined in the theory, even locally. It is explained that a rigorous definition of time, as well as a formulation of the causality and locality concepts, can only be given when one has a model for the physical phenomena described. The only viable causality condition is one that is symmetric under time reversal. We explain these statements in terms of the author’s favoured deterministic cellular automaton interpretation of quantum mechanics, also to be referred to as 'vector space analysis', and expand on these ideas. It is also summarised how our more rigorous causality condition affects Bell’s theorems. What distinguishes quantum systems from classical ones is our fundamental inability to control the microscopic details of the initial state when phenomena are studied in the light of some theoretical model.
This paper is a natural continuation of our previous paper arXiv:1011.4173 . We illustrated earlier that in classical Hamilton mechanics, for overwhelming majority of real chaotic macroscopic systems, alignment of their thermodynamic time arrows occurs because of their low interaction. This fact and impossibility to observe entropy decrease at introspection explain the second law of thermodynamics. The situation in quantum mechanics is even a little bit easier: all closed systems of finite volume are periodic or nearly periodic. The proof in quantum mechanics is in many respects similar to the proof in classical Hamilton mechanics - it also uses small interaction between subsystems and impossibility to observe entropy decrease at introspection. However, there are special cases which were not found in the classical mechanics. In these cases one microstate corresponds to a set of possible macrostates (more precisely, their quantum superposition). Consideration of this property with use of decoherence theory and taking into account thermodynamic time arrows will introduce new outcomes in quantum mechanics. It allows to resolve basic paradoxes of quantum mechanics: (a) to explain the paradox of wave packet reduction at measurements when an observer is included in the system (introspection) (paradox of the Schrodinger cat); (b) to explain unobservability of superposition of macroscopic states by an external observer in real experiments (paradox of Wigner's friend); (c) to prove full equivalence of multi-world and Copenhagen interpretations of quantum mechanics; (d) to explain deviations from the exponential law at decay of particles and pass from one energy level to another (paradox of a kettle which will never begin to boil).
The quantum measurement problem remains one of the most profound unresolved issues in fundamental physics. While quantum mechanics delivers extraordinarily precise statistical predictions, it does not specify a physical mechanism by which definite classical outcomes arise from quantum superpositions. Decoherence theory accounts for the suppression of interference but does not explain outcome selection or the stability of classical reality. This paper investigates quantum measurement within the framework of Relativistic Coherent Vacuum Gravity Theory (rCVGT). In rCVGT, the vacuum is modeled as a structured relativistic medium characterized by a coherence order parameter ψ(x), a coherence magnitude Q(x) = |ψ(x)|², a vacuum-flow four-field u^μ(x), and a physical time-rate field τ(x). We propose that quantum measurement corresponds to a dynamical instability of vacuum coherence induced by macroscopic coupling to matter and radiation. Classical outcomes emerge when local vacuum coherence is driven below a critical stability threshold, resulting in an irreversible reconfiguration of the vacuum state. The collapse timescale is determined by the vacuum-coherence self-energy defined within rCVGT. This mechanism simultaneously provides a physical foundation for classicality, irreversibility, and the arrow of time. The framework preserves the formal structure and empirical predictions of quantum mechanics while offering a unified physical explanation of measurement grounded in relativistic vacuum dynamics.