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

A Simple Proof That Finite Quantum Theory And Finite Mathematics Are More Fundamental Than Standard Quantum Theory And Classical Mathematics, Respectively

Felix M. Lev

Published Mar 24, 2019• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

Standard quantum theory is based on classical mathematics involving such notions as infinitely small/large and continuity. Those notions were proposed by Newton and Leibniz more than 300 years ago when people believed that every object can be divided by an arbitrarily large number of arbitrarily small parts. However, now it is obvious that when we reach the level of atoms and elementary particles then standard division loses its meaning and in nature there are no infinitely small objects and no continuity. In our previous publications we proposed a version of finite quantum theory (FQT) based on a finite ring or field with characteristic $p$. In the present paper we first define the notion when theory A is more general than theory B and theory B is a special degenerate case of theory A. Then we prove that standard quantum theory is a special degenerate case of FQT in the formal limit $p\to\infty$. Since quantum theory is the most general physics theory, this implies that classical mathematics itself is a special degenerate case of finite mathematics in the formal limit when the characteristic of the ring or field in the latter goes to infinity. In general, introducing infinity automatically implies transition to a degenerate theory because in that case all operations modulo a number are lost. So, {\it even from the pure mathematical point of view}, the very notion of infinity cannot be fundamental, and theories involving infinities can be only approximations to more general theories. Motivation and implications are discussed.

Related papers

Finite Mathematics, Finite Quantum Theory and a Conjecture on the Nature of Time

Felix M. Lev

We first give a rigorous mathematical proof that classical mathematics (involving such notions as infinitely small/large, continuity etc.) is a special degenerate case of finite one in the formal limit when the characteristic p of the field or ring in finite mathematics goes to infinity. We consider a finite quantum theory (FQT) based on finite mathematics and prove that standard continuous quantum theory is a special case of FQT in the formal limit $$p \to \infty .$$ The description of states in standard quantum theory contains a big redundancy of elements: the theory is based on real numbers while with any desired accuracy the states can be described by using only integers, i.e. rational and real numbers play only auxiliary role. Therefore, in FQT infinities cannot exist in principle, FQT is based on a more fundamental mathematics than standard quantum theory and the description of states in FQT is much more thrifty than in standard quantum theory. Space and time are purely classical notions and are not present in FQT at all. In the present paper we discuss how classical equations of motions arise as a consequence of the fact that p changes, i.e. p is the evolution parameter. It is shown that there exist scenarios when classical equations of motion for cosmological acceleration and gravity can be formulated exclusively in terms of quantum quantities without using space, time and standard semiclassical approximation.

arXiv:1711.04607•Physics of Particles and Nuclei•Jul 1, 2019•6 citations

Why finite mathematics is the most fundamental and ultimate quantum theory will be based on finite mathematics

Felix M. Lev

Classical mathematics (involving such notions as infinitely small/large and continuity) is usually treated as fundamental while finite mathematics is treated as inferior which is used only in special applications. We first argue that the situation is the opposite: classical mathematics is only a degenerate special case of finite one and finite mathematics is more pertinent for describing nature than standard one. Then we describe results of a quantum theory based on finite mathematics. Implications for foundation of mathematics are discussed.

arXiv:1409.2777•Physics of Particles and Nuclei Letters•Jan 1, 2017•2 citations

Main Problems in Constructing Quantum Theory Based on Finite Mathematics

Felix M. Lev

As shown in our publications, quantum theory based on a finite ring of characteristic p (FQT) is more general than standard quantum theory (SQT) because the latter is a degenerate case of the former in the formal limit p→∞. One of the main differences between SQT and FQT is the following. In SQT, elementary objects are described by irreducible representations (IRs) of a symmetry algebra in which energies are either only positive or only negative and there are no IRs where there are states with different signs of energy. In the first case, objects are called particles, and in the second antiparticles. As a consequence, in SQT it is possible to introduce conserved quantum numbers (electric charge, baryon number, etc.) so that particles and antiparticles differ in the signs of these numbers. However, in FQT, all IRs necessarily contain states with both signs of energy. The symmetry in FQT is higher than the symmetry in SQT because one IR in FQT splits into two IRs in SQT with positive and negative energies at p→∞. Consequently, most fundamental quantum theory will not contain the concepts of particle–antiparticle and additive quantum numbers. These concepts are only good approximations at present since at this stage of the universe the value p is very large but it was not so large at earlier stages. The above properties of IRs in SQT and FQT have been discussed in our publications with detailed technical proofs. The purpose of this paper is to consider models where these properties can be derived in a much simpler way.

arXiv:2412.01846•Mathematics•Nov 26, 2024•1 citation

Symmetries in Foundation of Quantum Theory and Mathematics

Felix M. Lev

In standard quantum theory, symmetry is defined in the spirit of Klein’s Erlangen Program—the background space has a symmetry group, and the basic operators should commute according to the Lie algebra of that group. We argue that the definition should be the opposite—background space has a direct physical meaning only on classical level while on quantum level symmetry should be defined by a Lie algebra of basic operators. Then the fact that de Sitter symmetry is more general than Poincare symmetry can be proved mathematically. The problem of explaining cosmological acceleration is very difficult but, as follows from our results, there exists a scenario in which the phenomenon of cosmological acceleration can be explained by proceeding from basic principles of quantum theory. The explanation has nothing to do with existence or nonexistence of dark energy and therefore the cosmological constant problem and the dark energy problem do not arise. We consider finite quantum theory (FQT) where states are elements of a space over a finite ring or field with characteristic p and operators of physical quantities act in this space. We prove that, with the same approach to symmetry, FQT and finite mathematics are more general than standard quantum theory and classical mathematics, respectively: the latter theories are special degenerated cases of the former ones in the formal limit p → ∞ .

arXiv:2003.05736•Symmetry•Mar 4, 2020•10 citations

Why Theory of Quantum Computing Should be Based on Finite Mathematics

Felix M. Lev

We discuss finite quantum theory (FQT) developed in our previous publications and give a simple explanation that standard quantum theory is a special case of FQT in the formal limit p → ∞ where p is the characteristic of the ring or field used in FQT. Then we argue that FQT is a more natural basis for quantum computing than standard quantum theory.

•Nov 11, 2018•0 citations

Quantum Theory and Observer's Mathematics

Dmitriy Khots, Boris Khots, Guillaume Adenier +4 more

When we consider and analyze physical events with the purpose of creating corresponding mathematical models we often assume that the mathematical apparatus used in modeling, at least the simplest mathematical apparatus, is infallible. In particular, this relates to the use of infinitely small and infinitely large numbers in arithmetic and the use of Newton's definition of a limit in analysis. We believe that is where the main problem lies in contemporary study of nature (physics, genetics). We have introduced a new concept of “Observer's Mathematics—Mathematics of Relativity” (see references). Observer's mathematics creates new arithmetic, algebra, geometry, topology, analysis and logic which do not contain the concept of continuum, but locally coincide with the standard fields. The concept of a quantum arises automatically from the human thought process, rather than from physics. From this point of view classical mechanics is brought closer to quantum mechanics.

AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2007•2 citations
Standard quantum theory is based on classical mathematics involving such notions as infinitely small/large and continuity. Those notions were proposed by Newton and Leibniz more than 300 years ago when people believed that every object can be divided by an arbitrarily large number of arbitrarily small parts. However, now it is obvious that when we reach the level of atoms and elementary particles then standard division loses its meaning and in nature there are no infinitely small objects and no continuity. In our previous publications we proposed a version of finite quantum theory (FQT) based on a finite ring or field with characteristic ppp. In the present paper we first define the notion when theory A is more general than theory B and theory B is a special degenerate case of theory A. Then we prove that standard quantum theory is a special degenerate case of FQT in the formal limit p→∞p\to\inftyp→∞. Since quantum theory is the most general physics theory, this implies that classical mathematics itself is a special degenerate case of finite mathematics in the formal limit when the characteristic of the ring or field in the latter goes to infinity. In general, introducing infinity automatically implies transition to a degenerate theory because in that case all operations modulo a number are lost. So, {\it even from the pure mathematical point of view}, the very notion of infinity cannot be fundamental, and theories involving infinities can be only approximations to more general theories. Motivation and implications are discussed.
We first give a rigorous mathematical proof that classical mathematics (involving such notions as infinitely small/large, continuity etc.) is a special degenerate case of finite one in the formal limit when the characteristic p of the field or ring in finite mathematics goes to infinity. We consider a finite quantum theory (FQT) based on finite mathematics and prove that standard continuous quantum theory is a special case of FQT in the formal limit p→∞.p \to \infty .p→∞. The description of states in standard quantum theory contains a big redundancy of elements: the theory is based on real numbers while with any desired accuracy the states can be described by using only integers, i.e. rational and real numbers play only auxiliary role. Therefore, in FQT infinities cannot exist in principle, FQT is based on a more fundamental mathematics than standard quantum theory and the description of states in FQT is much more thrifty than in standard quantum theory. Space and time are purely classical notions and are not present in FQT at all. In the present paper we discuss how classical equations of motions arise as a consequence of the fact that p changes, i.e. p is the evolution parameter. It is shown that there exist scenarios when classical equations of motion for cosmological acceleration and gravity can be formulated exclusively in terms of quantum quantities without using space, time and standard semiclassical approximation.
Classical mathematics (involving such notions as infinitely small/large and continuity) is usually treated as fundamental while finite mathematics is treated as inferior which is used only in special applications. We first argue that the situation is the opposite: classical mathematics is only a degenerate special case of finite one and finite mathematics is more pertinent for describing nature than standard one. Then we describe results of a quantum theory based on finite mathematics. Implications for foundation of mathematics are discussed.
As shown in our publications, quantum theory based on a finite ring of characteristic p (FQT) is more general than standard quantum theory (SQT) because the latter is a degenerate case of the former in the formal limit p→∞. One of the main differences between SQT and FQT is the following. In SQT, elementary objects are described by irreducible representations (IRs) of a symmetry algebra in which energies are either only positive or only negative and there are no IRs where there are states with different signs of energy. In the first case, objects are called particles, and in the second antiparticles. As a consequence, in SQT it is possible to introduce conserved quantum numbers (electric charge, baryon number, etc.) so that particles and antiparticles differ in the signs of these numbers. However, in FQT, all IRs necessarily contain states with both signs of energy. The symmetry in FQT is higher than the symmetry in SQT because one IR in FQT splits into two IRs in SQT with positive and negative energies at p→∞. Consequently, most fundamental quantum theory will not contain the concepts of particle–antiparticle and additive quantum numbers. These concepts are only good approximations at present since at this stage of the universe the value p is very large but it was not so large at earlier stages. The above properties of IRs in SQT and FQT have been discussed in our publications with detailed technical proofs. The purpose of this paper is to consider models where these properties can be derived in a much simpler way.
In standard quantum theory, symmetry is defined in the spirit of Klein’s Erlangen Program—the background space has a symmetry group, and the basic operators should commute according to the Lie algebra of that group. We argue that the definition should be the opposite—background space has a direct physical meaning only on classical level while on quantum level symmetry should be defined by a Lie algebra of basic operators. Then the fact that de Sitter symmetry is more general than Poincare symmetry can be proved mathematically. The problem of explaining cosmological acceleration is very difficult but, as follows from our results, there exists a scenario in which the phenomenon of cosmological acceleration can be explained by proceeding from basic principles of quantum theory. The explanation has nothing to do with existence or nonexistence of dark energy and therefore the cosmological constant problem and the dark energy problem do not arise. We consider finite quantum theory (FQT) where states are elements of a space over a finite ring or field with characteristic p and operators of physical quantities act in this space. We prove that, with the same approach to symmetry, FQT and finite mathematics are more general than standard quantum theory and classical mathematics, respectively: the latter theories are special degenerated cases of the former ones in the formal limit p → ∞ .
When we consider and analyze physical events with the purpose of creating corresponding mathematical models we often assume that the mathematical apparatus used in modeling, at least the simplest mathematical apparatus, is infallible. In particular, this relates to the use of infinitely small and infinitely large numbers in arithmetic and the use of Newton's definition of a limit in analysis. We believe that is where the main problem lies in contemporary study of nature (physics, genetics). We have introduced a new concept of “Observer's Mathematics—Mathematics of Relativity” (see references). Observer's mathematics creates new arithmetic, algebra, geometry, topology, analysis and logic which do not contain the concept of continuum, but locally coincide with the standard fields. The concept of a quantum arises automatically from the human thought process, rather than from physics. From this point of view classical mechanics is brought closer to quantum mechanics.