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

Investination of the Development of Physics in the Light of Physical Methodology

Zeng Zhu-shi

Published Jan 1, 2002• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

The development of physics is investigated in the light of methodology. Two revelations are derived : The deterministic description and probabilistic description co-exist side by side in Newton Mechanics,Quantum Mechanics and Statistic Physics. It is faced with the possibility of a third great synthetization.

Related papers

Methodological Paradigm of Non-Classical Science

Галухин Андрей Владимирович, Elena Vladimirovna Malakhova, Irina Ponizovkina

Scientific theories and methods developed within the framework of quantum and relativistic physics are the most representative paradigmatic instantiations of non-classical science. The profile of non-classical science is exposed through the analysis of a set of epistemic ideals and methodological principles. The adoption of the principle of operational relativity of phenomenal descriptions showed that a reference to the means of observation had become an intrinsic part of scientific description strategies. The transformation of the concept of objectivity can be seen in a specific combination of operationalism with interactional phenomenalism and constructivism. The introduction of the principle of complementarity marked the deviation from the standards of a monologic and linear description of the objects under study. This principle provides the operational basis for the integration of different parts of our knowledge with regard to non-trivial cognitive situations featured by the indeterminacy relations. Another prominent methodological trend is the reconsideration of the value of strict deterministic explanation strategies in favour of probabilistically oriented approaches. Scientists have encountered a new class of regularities that are typically analysed in terms of various types of statistical and non-causal determination. Nevertheless, it would be wrong to assume that any probabilistic account of natural phenomena implies indeterminism.

wisdom•Mar 28, 2022•0 citations

The Content, Essence OF the Statistical Method AND Its Role in Physical Science

S. K. (Satarkulov) R

The article shows the implementation of quantum physics based on the statistical method and the role of the statistical method in physical science.

•Apr 25, 2024•0 citations

Limitations Of Newton's Second Law In The Quantum Realm: A Comparative Analysis With Quantum Physics

Balakrishna M.T

Newton's second law of motion, F = ma, has long been considered a cornerstone of classical mechanics, providing a fundamental framework for understanding the behavior of macroscopic objects. However, as physics delves into the quantum realm, the applicability of Newton's second law becomes limited, and the principles of quantum mechanics emerge as the dominant description of particle behavior. Beginning with an overview of the historical development of classical mechanics by Newton and the emergence of quantum mechanics in the early 20th century, the article delves into the foundational principles of framework. The classical description of particles as point masses with deterministic trajectories is contrasted with the probabilistic nature of quantum particles described by wave functions and superposition principles. Practical applications and implications of these theories are also discussed, shedding light on their significance in various scientific disciplines. This research article presents a comparative analysis of Newton's second law of motion and quantum physics, examining their fundamental principles and implications through the lens of classical and quantum mechanics. Beginning with an overview of Newton's second law and its significance in classical mechanics, the article delves into the foundational postulates of quantum mechanics and their departure from classical concepts. This explores the inherent limitations of Newton's second law when applied to quantum phenomena, comparing and contrasting its principles with those of quantum physics. Through a comprehensive analysis of evidence and theoretical frameworks, this article elucidates the boundaries of classical mechanics and highlights the need for quantum mechanics to describe phenomena at the atomic and subatomic levels. Through an exploration of key differences and similarities, this aims to provide insights into the behavior of particles at both macroscopic and microscopic scales

Educational Administration Theory and Practice journal•Apr 4, 2024•0 citations

Paper 38A: Companion Volume Full Derivation Chain, Ontology, and Physical Interpretation of the OPR-QM.A Programme

Igor Grčman

This companion volume to Paper 38 reconstructs the OPR-QM.A programme as a continuous derivation chain with explicit epistemic discipline, while also providing the ontological and interpretive framework needed to read that chain coherently. Its role is not theorem-level augmentation, and it introduces no new derivations beyond the established 7-block chain. Instead, it supplies the missing continuity between previously separated insight blocks by making explicit the layer structure of the EDC framework — Plenum, Brane, Face A, Face B, and Observer — and by clarifying the category discipline required when intrinsic and observer-side language are mixed. The central theme of the document is the two-formalism bridge problem. On the intrinsic side, the Plenum/Face A description is written in the language of topology, gauge transport, lattice structure, Y-junctions, winding sectors, and brane manifestation. On the observer side, physics is expressed in the language of L^2 states, Fourier coefficients, amplitudes, probabilities, and particle readouts. The companion argues that the task of OPR-QM.A is therefore not to “invent” quantum mechanics after the fact, but to construct a controlled bridge between two already meaningful but non-identical mathematical languages. In this reading, quantum mechanics is treated as the observer-side representational formalism of Face B, while the Plenum remains the intrinsic ontological layer. The document also presents the full interpretive version of the derivation chain: the declared action and the negative verdict on \Phi-dynamics, the Maxwell/KK foothold, the failure of the naïve dipole model for co-located Y/\bar Y, the excised cell with arm-resolved holonomy, the C_3 \times Z_2 symmetry structure, the KK Aharonov–Bohm bridge into the \xi-Fourier language, the intrinsic C=T equipartition baseline, and the tilt-projection mechanism that deforms observer-side readout weights. Within this chain, the companion makes the closure boundary explicit: the observer-side ratio pathway is now characterized as a function of tilt angle and arm geometry, while the magnitude/Born-probability pathway remains open, blocked by the absence of \Phi-dynamics in the current SEDC action. Full OPR-QM.A closure is therefore not claimed. A further aim of the companion is philosophical and methodological clarity. It explains why questions such as “Where is the Schrödinger equation in the Plenum?” or “What is the probability of a Y-junction in the Plenum?” are category errors unless the manifestation/projection map is first specified. It also clarifies the distinct role of TILT: not as a fifth force mode, but as the brane’s manifestation law governing how intrinsic structure appears on Face B. In this way, the companion volume serves as the conceptual bridge document of the Paper 38 / Paper 38A package: Paper 38 establishes the mathematical apparatus framework, Paper 38A Proof Ledger audits the derivation spine, and this Companion explains how the chain should be read physically and ontologically without overstating what is already closed.

•Apr 4, 2026•0 citations

Causality and probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics

Slavnov D. A

It is shown that probabilistic treatment of quantum mechanics can be coordinated with causality of all physical processes. The physical interpretation of quantum-mechanical phenomena such as process of measurement and collapse of quantum state is given.

arXiv:quant-ph/0001061•Jan 18, 2000•2 citations

On Physical Principles of Quantum Mechanics

Gen Kimura

The problem to search physical principles of Quantum Mechanics is discussed by focusing on its significance from both points of view of instrumentalism and realism. After a brief review of the general probabilistic theories, we introduce the recent developments of the problem which are derived especially in the field of quantum information theory.

Journal of the Japan Association for Philosophy of Science•Jan 1, 2013•16 citations
Scientific theories and methods developed within the framework of quantum and relativistic physics are the most representative paradigmatic instantiations of non-classical science. The profile of non-classical science is exposed through the analysis of a set of epistemic ideals and methodological principles. The adoption of the principle of operational relativity of phenomenal descriptions showed that a reference to the means of observation had become an intrinsic part of scientific description strategies. The transformation of the concept of objectivity can be seen in a specific combination of operationalism with interactional phenomenalism and constructivism. The introduction of the principle of complementarity marked the deviation from the standards of a monologic and linear description of the objects under study. This principle provides the operational basis for the integration of different parts of our knowledge with regard to non-trivial cognitive situations featured by the indeterminacy relations. Another prominent methodological trend is the reconsideration of the value of strict deterministic explanation strategies in favour of probabilistically oriented approaches. Scientists have encountered a new class of regularities that are typically analysed in terms of various types of statistical and non-causal determination. Nevertheless, it would be wrong to assume that any probabilistic account of natural phenomena implies indeterminism.
Newton's second law of motion, F = ma, has long been considered a cornerstone of classical mechanics, providing a fundamental framework for understanding the behavior of macroscopic objects. However, as physics delves into the quantum realm, the applicability of Newton's second law becomes limited, and the principles of quantum mechanics emerge as the dominant description of particle behavior. Beginning with an overview of the historical development of classical mechanics by Newton and the emergence of quantum mechanics in the early 20th century, the article delves into the foundational principles of framework. The classical description of particles as point masses with deterministic trajectories is contrasted with the probabilistic nature of quantum particles described by wave functions and superposition principles. Practical applications and implications of these theories are also discussed, shedding light on their significance in various scientific disciplines. This research article presents a comparative analysis of Newton's second law of motion and quantum physics, examining their fundamental principles and implications through the lens of classical and quantum mechanics. Beginning with an overview of Newton's second law and its significance in classical mechanics, the article delves into the foundational postulates of quantum mechanics and their departure from classical concepts. This explores the inherent limitations of Newton's second law when applied to quantum phenomena, comparing and contrasting its principles with those of quantum physics. Through a comprehensive analysis of evidence and theoretical frameworks, this article elucidates the boundaries of classical mechanics and highlights the need for quantum mechanics to describe phenomena at the atomic and subatomic levels. Through an exploration of key differences and similarities, this aims to provide insights into the behavior of particles at both macroscopic and microscopic scales
This companion volume to Paper 38 reconstructs the OPR-QM.A programme as a continuous derivation chain with explicit epistemic discipline, while also providing the ontological and interpretive framework needed to read that chain coherently. Its role is not theorem-level augmentation, and it introduces no new derivations beyond the established 7-block chain. Instead, it supplies the missing continuity between previously separated insight blocks by making explicit the layer structure of the EDC framework — Plenum, Brane, Face A, Face B, and Observer — and by clarifying the category discipline required when intrinsic and observer-side language are mixed. The central theme of the document is the two-formalism bridge problem. On the intrinsic side, the Plenum/Face A description is written in the language of topology, gauge transport, lattice structure, Y-junctions, winding sectors, and brane manifestation. On the observer side, physics is expressed in the language of L^2 states, Fourier coefficients, amplitudes, probabilities, and particle readouts. The companion argues that the task of OPR-QM.A is therefore not to “invent” quantum mechanics after the fact, but to construct a controlled bridge between two already meaningful but non-identical mathematical languages. In this reading, quantum mechanics is treated as the observer-side representational formalism of Face B, while the Plenum remains the intrinsic ontological layer. The document also presents the full interpretive version of the derivation chain: the declared action and the negative verdict on \Phi-dynamics, the Maxwell/KK foothold, the failure of the naïve dipole model for co-located Y/\bar Y, the excised cell with arm-resolved holonomy, the C_3 \times Z_2 symmetry structure, the KK Aharonov–Bohm bridge into the \xi-Fourier language, the intrinsic C=T equipartition baseline, and the tilt-projection mechanism that deforms observer-side readout weights. Within this chain, the companion makes the closure boundary explicit: the observer-side ratio pathway is now characterized as a function of tilt angle and arm geometry, while the magnitude/Born-probability pathway remains open, blocked by the absence of \Phi-dynamics in the current SEDC action. Full OPR-QM.A closure is therefore not claimed. A further aim of the companion is philosophical and methodological clarity. It explains why questions such as “Where is the Schrödinger equation in the Plenum?” or “What is the probability of a Y-junction in the Plenum?” are category errors unless the manifestation/projection map is first specified. It also clarifies the distinct role of TILT: not as a fifth force mode, but as the brane’s manifestation law governing how intrinsic structure appears on Face B. In this way, the companion volume serves as the conceptual bridge document of the Paper 38 / Paper 38A package: Paper 38 establishes the mathematical apparatus framework, Paper 38A Proof Ledger audits the derivation spine, and this Companion explains how the chain should be read physically and ontologically without overstating what is already closed.