I will argue that the proposal of establishing operational foundations of Quantum Theory should have top‐priority, and that the Lucien Hardy's program on Quantum Gravity should be paralleled by an analogous program on Quantum Field Theory (QFT), which needs to be reformulated, notwithstanding its experimental success. In this paper, after reviewing recently suggested operational "principles of the quantumness," I address the problem on whether Quantum Theory and Special Relativity are unrelated theories, or instead, if the one implies the other. I show how Special Relativity can be indeed derived from causality of Quantum Theory, within the computational paradigm "the universe is a huge quantum computer," reformulating QFT as a Quantum‐Computational Field Theory (QCFT). In QCFT Special Relativity emerges from the fabric of the computational network, which also naturally embeds gauge invariance. In this scheme even the quantization rule and the Planck constant can in principle be derived as emergent from the underlying causal tapestry of space‐time. In this way Quantum Theory remains the only theory operating the huge computer of the universe.
I will argue that the proposal of establishing operational foundations of Quantum Theory should have top‐priority, and that the Lucien Hardy's program on Quantum Gravity should be paralleled by an analogous program on Quantum Field Theory (QFT), which needs to be reformulated, notwithstanding its experimental success. In this paper, after reviewing recently suggested operational "principles of the quantumness," I address the problem on whether Quantum Theory and Special Relativity are unrelated theories, or instead, if the one implies the other. I show how Special Relativity can be indeed derived from causality of Quantum Theory, within the computational paradigm "the universe is a huge quantum computer," reformulating QFT as a Quantum‐Computational Field Theory (QCFT). In QCFT Special Relativity emerges from the fabric of the computational network, which also naturally embeds gauge invariance. In this scheme even the quantization rule and the Planck constant can in principle be derived as emergent from the underlying causal tapestry of space‐time. In this way Quantum Theory remains the only theory operating the huge computer of the universe.
I will argue that proposal of establishing operational foundations of Quantum The- ory should have top-priority, and that Lucien Hardy's program on Quantum Gravity should be paralleled by an analogous program on Quantum Field Theory (QFT), which needs to be reformu- lated, notwithstanding its experimental success. In this paper, after reviewing recently suggested operational principles of quantumness, I address problem on whether Quantum Theory and Special Relativity are unrelated theories, or instead, if one implies other. I show how Special Relativity can be indeed derived from causality of Quantum Theory, within computa- tional paradigm the universe is a huge quantum computer, reformulating QFT as a Quantum- Computational Field Theory (QCFT). In QCFT Special Relativity emerges from fabric of computational network, which also naturally embeds gauge invariance. In this scheme even quantization rule and Planck constant can in principle be derived as emergent from under- lying causal tapestry of space-time. In this way Quantum Theory remains only theory operating huge computer of universe. Is computational paradigm only a speculative tautology (theory as simulation of reality), or does it have a scientific value? The answer will come from Occam's razor, depending on mathematical simplicity of QCFT. Here I will just start scratching surface of QCFT, analyzing simple field theories, including Dirac's. The number of problems and unmotivated recipes that plague QFT strongly motivates us to undertake QCFT project, since QCFT makes all such problems manifest, and forces a re-foundation of QFT.
After reviewing recently suggested operational "principles of the quantumness", I address the problem on whether Quantum Theory (QT) and Special Relativity (SR) are unrelated theories, or instead, if the one implies the other. I show how SR can be indeed derived from causality of QT, within the computational paradigm "the universe is a huge quantum computer", reformulating QFT as a Quantum-Computational Field Theory (QCFT). In QCFT SR emerges from the fabric of the computational network, which also naturally embeds gauge invariance. In this scheme even the quantization rule and the Planck constant can in principle be derived as emergent from the underlying causal tapestry of space-time. In this way QT remains the only theory operating the huge computer of the universe. Is QCFT only a speculative tautology (theory as simulation of reality), or does it have a scientific value? The answer will come from Occam's razor, depending on the mathematical simplicity of QCFT. Here I will just start scratching the surface of QCFT, analyzing simple field theories, including Dirac's. The number of problems and unmotivated recipes that plague QFT strongly motivates us to undertake the QCFT project, since QCFT makes all such problems manifest, and forces a re-foundation of QFT.
The experience from Quantum Information has lead us to look at Quantum Theory (QT) and the whole Physics from a different angle. The information‐theoretical paradigm—It from Bit— prophesied by John Archibald Wheeler is relentlessly advancing. Recently it has been shown that QT is derivable from pure informational principles. The possibility that there is only QT at the foundations of Physics has been then considered, with space‐time, Relativity, quantization rules and Quantum Field Theory (QFT) emerging from a quantum‐information processing. The resulting theory is a discrete version of QFT with automatic relativistic invariance, and without fields, Hamiltonian, and quantization rules. In this paper I review some recent advances on these lines. In particular: i) How space‐time and relativistic covariance emerge from the quantum computation; ii) The derivation of the Dirac equation as free information flow, without imposing Lorentz covariance; iii) the information‐theoretical meaning of inertial mass and Planck constant; iv) An observable consequence of the theory: a mass‐dependent refraction index of vacuum. I will then conclude with two possible routes to Quantum Gravity.
Based on a number of experimentally verified physical observations, it is argued that the standard principles of quantum mechanics should be applied to the Universe as a whole. Thus, a paradigm is proposed in which the entire Universe is represented by a pure state wavefunction contained in a factorisable Hilbert space of enormous dimension, and where this statevector is developed by successive applications of operators that correspond to unitary rotations and Hermitian tests. Moreover, because by definition the Universe contains everything, it is argued that these operators must be chosen self-referentially; the overall dynamics of the system is envisaged to be analogous to a gigantic, self-governing, quantum computation. The issue of how the Universe could choose these operators without requiring or referring to a fictitious external observer is addressed. The processes by which conventional physics might be recovered from this fundamental, mathematical and global description of reality are particularly investigated. Specifically, it is demonstrated that by considering the changing properties, separabilities and factorisations of both the state and the operators as the Universe proceeds though a sequence of discrete computations, familiar notions such as classical distinguishability, particle physics, space, time, special relativity and endo-physical experiments can all begin to emerge from the proposed picture. A pregeometric vision of cosmology is therefore discussed, with all of physics ultimately arising from the relationships occurring between the elements of the underlying mathematical structure.
We explain how the disparate kinematics of quantum mechanics (finite-dimensional Hilbert space of QM) and special relativity (Minkowski spacetime from the Lorentz transformations of SR) can both be based on one principle (relativity principle). This is made possible by the axiomatic reconstruction of QM via information-theoretic principles, which has successfully recast QM as a principle theory a la SR. That is, in the quantum reconstruction program (QRP) and SR, the formalisms (Hilbert space and Lorentz transformations, respectively) are derived from empirically discovered facts (Information Invariance & Continuity and light postulate, respectively), so QM and SR are "principle theories" as defined by Einstein. While SR has a compelling fundamental principle to justify its empirically discovered fact (relativity principle), QRP has not produced a compelling fundamental principle or causal mechanism to account for its empirically discovered fact. To unify these disparate kinematics, we show how the relativity principle ("no preferred reference frame" NPRF) can also be used to justify Information Invariance & Continuity. We do this by showing that when QRP's operational notion of measurement is spatialized, Information Invariance & Continuity entails the empirically discovered fact that everyone measures the same value for Planck's constant h, regardless of their relative spatial orientations or locations (Planck postulate). Since Poincare transformations relate inertial reference frames via spatial rotations and translations as well as boosts, the relativity principle justifies the Planck postulate just like it justifies the light postulate. Essentially, NPRF + c is an adynamical global constraint over the spacetime configuration of worldtubes for bodily objects while NPRF + h is an adynamical global constraint over the distribution of quanta among those bodily objects.
Abstract Quantum mechanics and relativity are two of the most successful theoretical frameworks in modern physics, yet their conceptual foundations remain difficult to reconcile at the deepest level. Quantum theory describes physical systems through states, observables, probabilities, measurement contexts, superposition, entanglement, and nonclassical correlations. Relativity describes physical processes through space-time structure, causal order, invariant physical law, observer-dependent decomposition of time and space, and constraints on signal propagation. This article examines the conceptual relationship between quantum measurement, relativistic causality, and space-time description. The purpose is not to present a mathematical unification but to analyze how the two frameworks organize physical explanation differently and where their interpretive tensions arise. Special attention is given to the measurement problem, the status of quantum states, the role of observers and reference frames, the meaning of locality, the distinction between correlation and causal influence, and the challenge of describing quantum processes without privileging a single global time. The article argues that many apparent conflicts between quantum theory and relativity result from importing classical intuitions into domains where they no longer apply. Quantum entanglement does not permit controllable faster-than-light communication, yet it challenges classical separability. Relativity forbids superluminal signaling, yet it does not require that all physically meaningful correlations be reducible to local classical properties. Measurement introduces another difficulty because standard quantum theory often describes state update in a way that appears instantaneous, while relativistic space-time does not provide a universal present. The discussion develops a conceptual framework in which quantum measurement is treated as a physical interaction, relativistic causality as a constraint on operational influence, and space-time description as an organizing structure for events rather than a simple background stage. This analysis is relevant for quantum field theory, quantum information, relativistic quantum foundations, and future approaches to quantum gravity.