Unifying quantum and classical physics has proved difficult as their postulates are conflicting. Using the notion of counts of the fundamental measures—length, mass, and time—a unifying description is resolved. A theoretical framework is presented in a set of postulates by which a conversion between expressions from quantum and classical physics can be made. Conversions of well-known expressions from different areas of physics (quantum physics, gravitation, optics and cosmology) exemplify the approach and mathematical procedures. The postulated integer counts of fundamental measures change our understanding of length, suggesting that our current understanding of reality is distorted.
Unifying quantum and classical physics has proved difficult as their postulates are conflicting. Using the notion of counts of the fundamental measures—length, mass, and time—a unifying description is resolved. A theoretical framework is presented in a set of postulates by which a conversion between expressions from quantum and classical physics can be made. Conversions of well-known expressions from different areas of physics (quantum physics, gravitation, optics and cosmology) exemplify the approach and mathematical procedures. The postulated integer counts of fundamental measures change our understanding of length, suggesting that our current understanding of reality is distorted.
Quantum physics is believed to be the fundamental theory underlying our understanding of the physical universe. However, it is based on concepts and principles that have always been difficult to understand and controversial in their interpretation. This book aims to explain these issues using a minimum of technical language and mathematics. After a brief introduction to the ideas of quantum physics, the problems of interpretation are identified and explained. The rest of the book surveys, describes and criticises a range of suggestions that have been made with the aim of resolving these problems; these include the traditional, or 'Copenhagen' interpretation, the possible role of the conscious mind in measurement, and the postulate of parallel universes. This new edition has been revised throughout to take into account developments in this field over the past fifteen years, including the idea of 'consistent histories' to which a completely new chapter is devoted.
Quantum physics is believed to be the fundamental theory underlying our understanding of the physical universe. However, it is based on concepts and principles that have always been difficult to understand and controversial in their interpretation. This book aims to explain these issues using a minimum of technical language and mathematics. After a brief introduction to the ideas of quantum physics, the problems of interpretation are identified and explained. The rest of the book surveys, describes and criticises a range of suggestions that have been made with the aim of resolving these problems; these include the traditional, or 'Copenhagen' interpretation, the possible role of the conscious mind in measurement and the postulate of parallel universes. This new edition has been revised throughout to take into account developments in this field over the past fifteen years, including the idea of 'consistent histories' to which a completely new chapter is devoted.
Abstract Quantum Theory, similar to Relativity Theory, requires a new concept of space-time, imposed by a universal constant. While velocity of lightcnot being infinite calls for a redefinition of space-time on large and cosmological scales, quantization of action in terms of a finite, i.e. non vanishing, universal constanthrequires a redefinition of space-time on very small scales. Most importantly, the classical notion of “time”, as one common continuous time variable and nature evolving continuously “in time”, has to be replaced by an infinite manifold of transition rates for discontinuous quantum transitions. The fundamental laws of quantum physics, commutation relations and quantum equations of motion, resulted from Max Born’s recognition of the basic principle of quantum physics:To each change in nature corresponds an integer number of quanta of action. Action variables may only change by integer values ofh, requiring all other physical quantities to change by discrete steps, “quantum jumps”. The mathematical implementation of this principle led to commutation relations and quantum equations of motion. The notion of “point” in space-time looses its physical significance; quantum uncertainties of time, position, just as any other physical quantity, are necessary consequences of quantization of action.
This paper demonstrates that the perceived "weirdness" and mathematical intractability of Quantum Theory are not inherent to nature, but are artifacts of a missing physical boundary. Current quantum models erroneously allow derivations to range between the limits of negative and positive infinity (−∞ to +∞), a practice we define as the KnoWellian Schizophrenia. This "Platonic Rift" creates a world of non-physical ghosts, including the Many-Worlds hypothesis, Boltzmann Brains, and gravitational singularities. We propose a rigorous correction: all physical derivations must be strictly restricted between the limits of the negative speed of light (−c) and the speed of light positive (c+). By replacing the infinite number line with a Luminous Computational Dialectic, we prove that reality is an irreversible Rendering Process governed by the KnoWellian Resonant Attractor Manifold (KRAM). The framework presented provides solutions to several fundamental problems in physics: 1. The Yang-Mills Mass Gap Problem: We derive the mass gap as the topological activation energy required for (3,2) torus knot formation in vacuum, proving Δ ≈ 1.5 GeV in agreement with lattice QCD predictions. 2. The Mott Problem: We resolve the paradox of how spherical wavefunctions create linear tracks through a rendering cascade mechanism where the first ionization event etches a directional KRAM groove that guides subsequent events. 3. The Non-Existence of Aleph-Null: We provide a formal proof that ℵ₀ cannot exist physically due to finite cosmic rendering rate bounded by Planck frequency (10⁴³ Hz). 4. The Riemann Hypothesis as Un-renderable: We demonstrate that the RH asks about properties of infinite sets (unrendered potential w(t)) from within a finite system (rendered actuality m(t)), making it fundamentally unprovable within procedural ontology. 5. The Hubble Tension: We resolve the discrepancy between local and CMB measurements as triadic parallax between temporal vectors, predicting H(z) = 73 − 6 × tanh(z/0.5) km/s/Mpc. 6. Boltzmann Brain Exorcism: We prove Boltzmann Brains cannot exist because KRAM memory filtering via Renormalization Group flow erases incoherent noise and favors deep, organized attractor basins. The theory introduces Ternary Time structure (Past/Control, Future/Chaos, Instant/Consciousness), the KnoWellian Soliton as fundamental particle topology, and POMMM (Parallel Optical Matrix-Matrix Multiplication) as the computational mechanism of reality. The framework redefines the observer not as passive witness but as Fractal Quantum Being—the active processor of the cosmic Loom. Six falsifiable predictions are provided with specific quantitative targets: CMB pentagonal signatures (P_excess > 0.3) Morphic acceleration in crystallization (τ_N = τ_1 × exp(−αN)) Gravitational wave spectral break at 10²² Hz Neural pentagonal phase-locking in meditation Hubble parameter redshift dependence Proton structure pentagonal geometry This work bridges quantum mechanics, cosmology, consciousness studies, and philosophy within a unified field-theoretic framework based on procedural ontology. It offers both rigorous mathematical foundations and profound implications for understanding the nature of reality, consciousness, and human agency in the cosmos. The paper is part of the KnoWellian Universe Theory (KUT) research program, which demonstrates that by restricting all physical derivations to the bounded domain [−c, c+], we find a universe that is fundamentally alive, intrinsically meaningful, and eternally learning.
In this paper a didactic approach is described which immediately leads to an understanding of those postulates of quantum mechanics used most frequently in quantum computation. Moreover, an interpretation of quantum mechanics is presented which is motivated by retaining the point of view of classical mechanics as much as possible, and which is consistent with relativity theory. Everything can be written down in terms of well-known mathematical formulations that can be found in every textbook about quantum mechanics. Therefore, in this version, almost no formulas are used.
THE PROBLEM Within classical physics the relation between physical theory and ordinary experience was conceived in the following way: ordinary experience is something that can be described and understood in terms of physics. Such a description involves, apart from physical theory, certain approximations. But the conditons under which those approximations apply (they correspond to the initial conditions of, say, celestial mechanics), taken together with the theory, are supposed to be sufficient for giving a full account of ordinary experience. Consequently, classical theory of measurement (which, like any other theory of measurement, links together terms of ordinary experience and theoretical terms), is a piece of applied physics and all processes which happen during measurement can be analysed on the basis of the equations of motion only. When we enter quantum mechanics (QM), we are apparently presented with a completely different picture. For according to the current interpretation of elementary quantum mechanics, ordinary experience – and this now means classical physics – and physical theory (and this now means QM), belong to two completely different levels and it is impossible to give an account of the first in terms of the second. Any transition from the quantum level to the level of classical physics must be taken, not as a transition within QM from the general to the particular, but as an essentially new element which is incapable of further analysis.