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

My Understanding of Stagnation in Foundation of Physics

Felix M. Lev

Published May 6, 2020• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

Sabine Hossenfelder argues in her blog [1] that the present situation in foundation of physics should be called not crisis but stagnation. I argue that the main reason of the stagnation is that quantum theory inherited from classical one several notions which should not be present in quantum theory. In particular , quantum theory should not involve the notion of space-time background and, since nature is discrete and even finite, quantum theory should not be based on classical mathematics involving the notions of infinitely small/large and continuity. I discuss uncertainty relations, paradox with observation of stars, symmetry on quantum level, cosmological acceleration, gravity and particle theory. My main conclusion is that the most general quantum theory should be based on finite mathematics and, as a consequence: Mathematics describing nature at the most fundamental level involves only a finite number of numbers while the notions of limit and infinitely small/large and the notions constructed from them (e.g. continuity, derivative and integral) are needed only in calculations describing nature approximately.

Related papers

Crisis in Quantum Theory and Its Possible Resolution

Felix M. Lev

It is argued that the main reason of crisis in quantum theory is that na-ture, which is fundamentally discrete, is described by continuous mathematics. Moreover, no ultimate physical theory can be based on continuous mathematics because, as follows from Gödel’s incompleteness theorems, any mathematics in-volving the set of all natural numbers has its own foundational problems which cannot be resolved. In the first part of the paper inconsistencies in standard approach to quantum theory are discussed and the theory is reformulated such that it can be naturally generalized to a formulation based on discrete and finite mathematics. Then the cosmological acceleration and gravity can be treated simply as kinematical manifestations of de Sitter symmetry on quantum level (i.e. for describing those phenomena the notions of dark energy, space-time background and gravitational interaction are not needed). In the second part of the paper motivation, ideas and main results of a quantum theory over a Galois field (GFQT) are described. In contrast to standard quantum theory, GFQT is based on a solid mathematics and therefore can be treated as a candidate for ultimate quantum theory. The presentation is non-technical and should be understandable by a wide audience of physicists and mathematicians.

•May 1, 2014•0 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

Space-Time in Quantum Theory

H. Capellmann

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.

arXiv:2006.00503•Foundations of Physics•Apr 1, 2021•15 citations

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

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

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

Felix M. Lev

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.

•Mar 24, 2019•0 citations
Sabine Hossenfelder argues in her blog [1] that the present situation in foundation of physics should be called not crisis but stagnation. I argue that the main reason of the stagnation is that quantum theory inherited from classical one several notions which should not be present in quantum theory. In particular , quantum theory should not involve the notion of space-time background and, since nature is discrete and even finite, quantum theory should not be based on classical mathematics involving the notions of infinitely small/large and continuity. I discuss uncertainty relations, paradox with observation of stars, symmetry on quantum level, cosmological acceleration, gravity and particle theory. My main conclusion is that the most general quantum theory should be based on finite mathematics and, as a consequence: Mathematics describing nature at the most fundamental level involves only a finite number of numbers while the notions of limit and infinitely small/large and the notions constructed from them (e.g. continuity, derivative and integral) are needed only in calculations describing nature approximately.
It is argued that the main reason of crisis in quantum theory is that na-ture, which is fundamentally discrete, is described by continuous mathematics. Moreover, no ultimate physical theory can be based on continuous mathematics because, as follows from Gödel’s incompleteness theorems, any mathematics in-volving the set of all natural numbers has its own foundational problems which cannot be resolved. In the first part of the paper inconsistencies in standard approach to quantum theory are discussed and the theory is reformulated such that it can be naturally generalized to a formulation based on discrete and finite mathematics. Then the cosmological acceleration and gravity can be treated simply as kinematical manifestations of de Sitter symmetry on quantum level (i.e. for describing those phenomena the notions of dark energy, space-time background and gravitational interaction are not needed). In the second part of the paper motivation, ideas and main results of a quantum theory over a Galois field (GFQT) are described. In contrast to standard quantum theory, GFQT is based on a solid mathematics and therefore can be treated as a candidate for ultimate quantum theory. The presentation is non-technical and should be understandable by a wide audience of physicists and mathematicians.
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.
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.
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.
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 → ∞ .
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.