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

Dynamics of observed reality: abridged version of classical and quantum mechanics. Technical report

Ahteshamul Haque, Thomas F. George

Published Aug 1, 1988• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

This paper is concerned with a unified description of classical and quantum physics. A different way of thinking about the quantum world is expounded, which already has led to significant results in statistical mechanics and holds future promise for quantum mechanics. An explanation is provided for the original motivation in quantum theory, the formalisms that have evolved from it, and their differences with the classical theories. The conceptual difficulty that permeates our view of the microscopic world is spelled out and a remedy thereof suggested.

Related papers

Quantum Magic and Quantum Mystery

Roger Penrose, Martin R. Gardner

In classical physics there is, in accordance with common sense, an objective world ‘out there’. That world evolves in a clear and deterministic way, being governed by precisely formulated mathematical equations. This is as true for the theories of Maxwell and Einstein as it is for the original Newtonian scheme. Physical reality is taken to exist independently of ourselves; and exactly how the classical world ‘is’ is not affected by how we might choose to look at it. Moreover, our bodies and our brains are themselves to be part of that world. They, also, are viewed as evolving according to the same precise and deterministic classical equations. All our actions are to be fixed by these equations - no matter how we might feel that our conscious wills may be influencing how we behave. Such a picture appears to lie at the background of most serious 1 philosophical arguments concerned with the nature of reality, of our conscious perceptions, and of our apparent free will. Some people might have an uncomfortable feeling that there should also be a role for quantum theory - that fundamental but disturbing scheme of things which, in the first quarter of this century, arose out of observations of subtle discrepancies between the actual behaviour of the world and the descriptions of classical physics. To many, the term ‘quantum theory’ evokes merely some vague concept of an ‘uncertainty principle’, which, at the level of particles, atoms or molecules, forbids precision in our descriptions and yields merely probabilistic behaviour. Actually, quantum descriptions are very precise, as we shall see, although radically different from the familiar classical ones. Moreover, we shall find, despite a common view to the contrary, that probabilities do not arise at the minute quantum level of particles, atoms, or molecules - those evolve deterministically - but, seemingly, via some mysterious larger-scale action connected with the emergence of a classical world that we can consciously perceive. We must try to understand this, and how quantum theory forces us to change our view of physical reality.

Oxford University Press eBooks•Oct 5, 1989•14 citations

Reexamining the Quantum-Classical Relation

Alisa Bokulich

Classical mechanics and quantum mechanics are two of the most successful scientific theories ever discovered, and yet how they can describe the same world is far from clear: one theory is deterministic, the other indeterministic; one theory describes a world in which chaos is pervasive, the other a world in which chaos is absent. Focusing on the exciting field of 'quantum chaos', this book reveals that there is a subtle and complex relation between classical and quantum mechanics. It challenges the received view that classical and quantum mechanics are incommensurable, and revives another, largely forgotten tradition due to Niels Bohr and Paul Dirac. By artfully weaving together considerations from the history of science, philosophy of science, and contemporary physics, this book offers a new way of thinking about intertheory relations and scientific explanation. It will be of particular interest to historians and philosophers of science, philosophically-inclined physicists, and interested non-specialists.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Oct 2, 2008•118 citations

The Physics of Quantum World of Particles

Varinderjit Kaur

The quantum world has always ignited human curiosity to unveil and speculate on the fascinating secrets of microscopic particles. This curiosity has opened a window to other branches of physics pushing the boundaries of classical understanding. After years of experimentation and analysis, scientists revealed that at microscopic dimensions, Newtonian mechanics failed not only quantitatively but even qualitatively and conceptually, clearing the way for new ideas. The nature of the difference between Newtonian mechanics and quantum mechanics is presented, with the core difference being the inherently probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics. This probabilistic foundation has led to revolutionary concepts like wave-particle duality and entanglement, fundamentally challenging classical ideas of causality and locality. The present article provides a well-focused and comprehensive overview of foundation ideas, concepts, and applications of quantum mechanics that make it principally different from Newtonian mechanics.

Journal of Advanced Research in Electronics Engineering and Technology•Dec 2, 2024•0 citations

Measurements in Quantum Mechanics

Mohammad Reza Pahlavani

Perhaps quantum mechanics is viewed as the most remarkable development in 20th century physics. Each successful theory is exclusively concerned about "results of measurement". Quantum mechanics point of view is completely different from classical physics in measurement, because in microscopic world of quantum mechanics, a direct measurement as classical form is impossible. Therefore, over the years of developments of quantum mechanics, always challenging part of quantum mechanics lies in measurements. This book has been written by an international invited group of authors and it is created to clarify different interpretation about measurement in quantum mechanics.

InTech eBooks•Feb 22, 2012•41 citations

Classical Mechanics

Jeffrey Alan Barrett

Abstract While quantum mechanics is one of the most successful physical theories we have ever had, it is deeply counterintuitive. It must be given the empirical evidence it explains. We consider some of the historical evidence for the theory and the conceptual arguments that led from classical mechanics to quantum mechanics. These considerations illustrate some of the ways in which our commonsense and philosophical intuitions are simply incompatible with the physical world.

•Dec 26, 2019•0 citations

A Toy-World That Satisfies Some Principles of “El Naschie’s E-Infinity Theory”

Hanns Sommer

The classical view of our external world is revised and its tacit a priori assumptions are confronted with consequences from Mohammed S. El Naschie’s E‐infinity theory. The far‐reaching investigations of El Naschie have demonstrated the necessity of a new unconventional thinking in physics. First we motivate the a priori assumptions of classical mechanics with the requirements of the mathematical formalisms. We explain the difficulties to construct models for a reality which shows the phenomenon of contextualism, like for example quantum mechanics. In a second step we use the principles of Husserl’s phenomenology to deduce a toy world from a contextual understanding of empirical data. In such a toy world one can illustrate the fundamental phenomena from quantum mechanics and ideas from E‐infinity theory. We will use this toy world to demonstrate that the classical a priori assumptions are not necessary and that alternative ways of thinking are possible in physics.

AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2006•0 citations
This paper is concerned with a unified description of classical and quantum physics. A different way of thinking about the quantum world is expounded, which already has led to significant results in statistical mechanics and holds future promise for quantum mechanics. An explanation is provided for the original motivation in quantum theory, the formalisms that have evolved from it, and their differences with the classical theories. The conceptual difficulty that permeates our view of the microscopic world is spelled out and a remedy thereof suggested.
In classical physics there is, in accordance with common sense, an objective world ‘out there’. That world evolves in a clear and deterministic way, being governed by precisely formulated mathematical equations. This is as true for the theories of Maxwell and Einstein as it is for the original Newtonian scheme. Physical reality is taken to exist independently of ourselves; and exactly how the classical world ‘is’ is not affected by how we might choose to look at it. Moreover, our bodies and our brains are themselves to be part of that world. They, also, are viewed as evolving according to the same precise and deterministic classical equations. All our actions are to be fixed by these equations - no matter how we might feel that our conscious wills may be influencing how we behave. Such a picture appears to lie at the background of most serious 1 philosophical arguments concerned with the nature of reality, of our conscious perceptions, and of our apparent free will. Some people might have an uncomfortable feeling that there should also be a role for quantum theory - that fundamental but disturbing scheme of things which, in the first quarter of this century, arose out of observations of subtle discrepancies between the actual behaviour of the world and the descriptions of classical physics. To many, the term ‘quantum theory’ evokes merely some vague concept of an ‘uncertainty principle’, which, at the level of particles, atoms or molecules, forbids precision in our descriptions and yields merely probabilistic behaviour. Actually, quantum descriptions are very precise, as we shall see, although radically different from the familiar classical ones. Moreover, we shall find, despite a common view to the contrary, that probabilities do not arise at the minute quantum level of particles, atoms, or molecules - those evolve deterministically - but, seemingly, via some mysterious larger-scale action connected with the emergence of a classical world that we can consciously perceive. We must try to understand this, and how quantum theory forces us to change our view of physical reality.
Classical mechanics and quantum mechanics are two of the most successful scientific theories ever discovered, and yet how they can describe the same world is far from clear: one theory is deterministic, the other indeterministic; one theory describes a world in which chaos is pervasive, the other a world in which chaos is absent. Focusing on the exciting field of 'quantum chaos', this book reveals that there is a subtle and complex relation between classical and quantum mechanics. It challenges the received view that classical and quantum mechanics are incommensurable, and revives another, largely forgotten tradition due to Niels Bohr and Paul Dirac. By artfully weaving together considerations from the history of science, philosophy of science, and contemporary physics, this book offers a new way of thinking about intertheory relations and scientific explanation. It will be of particular interest to historians and philosophers of science, philosophically-inclined physicists, and interested non-specialists.
The quantum world has always ignited human curiosity to unveil and speculate on the fascinating secrets of microscopic particles. This curiosity has opened a window to other branches of physics pushing the boundaries of classical understanding. After years of experimentation and analysis, scientists revealed that at microscopic dimensions, Newtonian mechanics failed not only quantitatively but even qualitatively and conceptually, clearing the way for new ideas. The nature of the difference between Newtonian mechanics and quantum mechanics is presented, with the core difference being the inherently probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics. This probabilistic foundation has led to revolutionary concepts like wave-particle duality and entanglement, fundamentally challenging classical ideas of causality and locality. The present article provides a well-focused and comprehensive overview of foundation ideas, concepts, and applications of quantum mechanics that make it principally different from Newtonian mechanics.
Perhaps quantum mechanics is viewed as the most remarkable development in 20th century physics. Each successful theory is exclusively concerned about "results of measurement". Quantum mechanics point of view is completely different from classical physics in measurement, because in microscopic world of quantum mechanics, a direct measurement as classical form is impossible. Therefore, over the years of developments of quantum mechanics, always challenging part of quantum mechanics lies in measurements. This book has been written by an international invited group of authors and it is created to clarify different interpretation about measurement in quantum mechanics.
The classical view of our external world is revised and its tacit a priori assumptions are confronted with consequences from Mohammed S. El Naschie’s E‐infinity theory. The far‐reaching investigations of El Naschie have demonstrated the necessity of a new unconventional thinking in physics. First we motivate the a priori assumptions of classical mechanics with the requirements of the mathematical formalisms. We explain the difficulties to construct models for a reality which shows the phenomenon of contextualism, like for example quantum mechanics. In a second step we use the principles of Husserl’s phenomenology to deduce a toy world from a contextual understanding of empirical data. In such a toy world one can illustrate the fundamental phenomena from quantum mechanics and ideas from E‐infinity theory. We will use this toy world to demonstrate that the classical a priori assumptions are not necessary and that alternative ways of thinking are possible in physics.