The Domain Theory

Asim M. Babikr

Published Mar 1, 2015• 0 citations

Abstract

● The theory in this stage is merely a proposal, an attempt to start looking and find the missing variables of Mechanics raised by Einstein in his papers, where he stated that Quantum Mechanics is correct indeed, but it is not the complete way of describing reality, we try to continue after his footsteps here. ● I am not saying or considering the theory as an empirical fact yet, -even if the style of writing would give such an impression, the style meant to help readers to live the possibility of the hypothesis and also for the purpose of convergence of views- but what I'm really saying, it deserves the investigation. ● The theory is intending to build upon the current theories and complete them, and it is not intending to replace them.

Related papers

Introduction

Sandro Petruccioli

‘Quantum mechanics is very impressive. But an inner voice tells me that it is not yet the real thing. The theory produces a good deal but hardly brings us closer to the secret of the Old One’. These views were contained in a letter written by Albert Einstein to Max Born in December 1926. Though the following year would see the completion of work on the theoretical foundation of the modern physics of atoms and particles, Einstein was never to change his judgement and remained firmly convinced that ‘this business […] contains some unreasonableness’. He was unwilling to sacrifice his own ideas as to the cognitive scope of science even in the face of the important results being achieved by the new theory. To the undeterministic findings of quantum mechanics he opposed his belief in the ‘possibility of giving a model of reality, a theory, that is to say, which shall represent events themselves and not merely the probability of their occurrence’. For this reason he chose to live with the isolation of his scepticism and dissent, ironically accepting the reputation as a obstinate heretic that he had won over the years among his colleagues, and worked to the end on his own research programme to develop a unified field theory of rigorously causal nature. As is generally known, Einstein carried on a strong scientific and philosophical dispute with the defenders of the so-called official interpretation of quantum mechanics.

Cambridge University Press eBooksNov 18, 19930 citations

Can We Consider Quantum Mechanics to Be a Description of Reality?

Hervé Zwirn C

Springer eBooksJan 1, 20082 citations

Letters to Anton Zeilinger

Christopher A. Fuchs

January 1999, “The (Un-)Detached Observer” Yesterday I ran across your paper “On the Interpretation and Philosophical Foundation of Quantum Mechanics” posted on the web, and was very much impressed with its depth. Most importantly, however, I am sad to say, it reminded me that I still owe you some papers. I have remedied that now by sending you a pile of things that I have written on the relation between information gain and quantum state disturbance. These are relevant to your request above, and, I think, even more relevant to the thoughts in your paper. I am in great agreement with the idea that there may be a deeper foundation to quantum mechanics, one along the lines that Pauli and Wheeler attempted to sketch. Quantum mechanics, it seems to me, is an expression of the best we can say in a world where the observer is not detached (to use Pauli's phrase). Recognizing and appreciating that lack of detachedness is the most exacting tool we have for peering into the greater future of quantum theory. This I think is the ultimate role of quantum information theory. (For the opposite point of view, however, you may be interested in having a look at John Preskill's paper “Quantum Information: Its Future Impact on Physics” at http://theory.caltech.edu/~preskill/.) I hope you will enjoy the things I have sent you; it is always my attempt to be as clear as I possibly can be when I write.

Cambridge University Press eBooksJan 6, 20110 citations

Epistemological Discussion with Einstein: Does Quantum Mechanics Describe Reality Correctly?

WORLD SCIENTIFIC eBooksDec 1, 19990 citations

Teoria do Cruzamento Quântico Clássico: Uma Proposta em Desenvolvimento

Artur Mendes Kur

This work presents the Theory of Quantum-Classical Crossover (TQCC), a conceptual proposal currently under development that seeks to explore the transition between quantum and classical regimes as a continuous process through which classicality emerges. The text is primarily explanatory, philosophical, and narrative in character. At this stage, it does not aim to present a rigorous physical formalism or a fully developed mathematical theory. Rather, its purpose is to articulate and clarify the central idea of the TQCC, tracing its conceptual development and exploring its possible implications. The proposal begins with the possibility of understanding the quantum and classical domains not as fundamentally separate realities, but as different regimes of a single underlying reality, connected by a progressive process of definition. In this context, the work introduces and explores the concept of a classicality parameter, represented by γ(t), as an initial attempt to describe this transition. The article also develops philosophical and ontological reflections surrounding the proposal and engages with questions related to quantum mechanics, decoherence, the emergence of classical reality, information, and the relationship between possibility and determination. The formulations presented should be regarded as preliminary and open to further development, reformulation, and mathematical formalization. The purpose of this version is primarily to document, present, and organize the hypothesis at its current stage of development, providing a starting point for future investigation and discussion within the scientific community.

Aug 5, 20260 citations

On the Nature of Quantum Geometry

Roger Penrose

@As a way of honoring Professor Wheeler on his sixtieth birthday, I propose to take this opportunity to elaborate upon certain somewhat speculative ideas which I have tried to hint at on occasion, concerning the possible nature of a quantized space-time. The reader will not need to be too discerning to recognize some substantial dierences between the ideas I am proposing here and those which Professor Wheeler has on many occasions so eloquently and forcefully put forward. Nonetheless, there is little doubt in my own mind as to the very great inspirational inuence that Professor Wheeler’s own views have had in the development of several of the thoughts which I am expressing here. To begin with, let me make clear that I do not necessarily mean by \quantized space-time something which could be obtained by applying standard (or even non-standard) techniques of quantization to Einstein’s general theory of relativity. What I wish to say has its roots in something which is really more primitive than either quantum theory or relativity as such. This is the question of the fundamental role played by the mathematical concept of continuum in virtually the whole of accepted present-day physical theory. Not only does the continuum occupy a basic position in our mathematical models of space and time (with the concomitant implication of a continuous nature for many related physical concepts such as velocity, energy, momentum, temperature, etc.), but so also does present-day quantum theory rest crucially on a continuum concept, namely on the two-dimensional complex continuum of probability amplitudes, this being the continuum which also occurs in the superposition law. Let me say at the outset that I am not happy with this state of aairs in physical theory. The mathematical continuum has always seemed to me to contain many features which are really very foreign to physics. This point = @ @

Jan 1, 197243 citations