For thousands of years, the law of cause and effect guided scientific inquiry. In fact, the history of the concept of causality can be traced through Hebrew, Babylonian, Greek and European cultures. Certain Greek philosophers, however, introduced the atomistic concept of chance-events to oppose the common-sense application of causality. The resulting conflict between cause versus chance has not only shaped the history of science but has imposed lasting effects on Western cul- ture as a whole. This conflict intensified during the Twentieth Century as the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP) became the leading tool of the proponents of chance. More recent findings have now demonstrated that the HUP fails in six actual cases. Common Sense Science counters chance-based philosophy by returning to causality and other principles of Classical Science such as the conser- vation of energy and the use of physical finite-sized models for fundamental particles (e.g., the electron). This paper shows how physical models based on the laws of electricity and magnetism fully implement the law of cause and effect in the manner of the four causes required by Aristotle. Chance-based physics is exposed as false science based on erroneous assumptions about supposed chance-events instead of causal relationships.
Author: Marco Lindenbeck Title: Deterministic Quantum Mechanics: Replacing the Copenhagen Pillars of Probability and Uncertainty with Discrete Substrate Logistics Description: For a century, the Copenhagen Interpretation has forced theoretical physics to accept a subatomic universe governed by random chance, probabilistic wave functions, and fundamental fuzziness. This paper demonstrates that these principles are not foundational truths of nature, but mathematical artifacts born from a single categorization error: treating the vacuum of space as a continuous, empty void. By applying the
ΩGLR framework—defining the vacuum as a discrete, pre-tensioned geometric network (the Topological Substrate) governed by a strict Pythagorean processing limit (
c2=u2+v2)—this paper entirely eliminates probability and uncertainty from the atomic scale. By mapping the discrete hardware that underlies quantum software, local realism, determinism, and absolute mechanical causality are fully restored to atomic physics. Key Mechanical Derivations Included: Replacing Schrödinger: The Topological Resonance Equation redefines electron energy levels as deterministic network routing paths. Replacing Heisenberg: The Uncertainty Principle (
ℏ/2) is mathematically mapped as the Substrate Resolution Limit—an asymptotic hardware buffer overrun (Bandwidth Saturation). The Bohr Radius & Rydberg Protocol: Re-derived as strict geometric hardware constraints and topological data exhaust. The Photoelectric Effect: Re-derived as localized structural bandwidth saturation. The Casimir Effect: The
1 Atmosphere measurement discrepancy is resolved mathematically via the discrete Bilateral Elasticity Factor (
2ϕ−2), eliminating the need for virtual zero-point particles.
Quantum Physics is usually defined as a theory that affirms a primary role of randomness and probability. Eleven well-known quantum experiments are examined and the result is the coexistence of both random and causal type behaviour. We need both to describe experiments. Quantum Mechanics states the general overcoming of causality and this statement constitutes an unlimited generalization, not supported by experience. Determinism and indeterminism are philosophical systems, that universalize causality or chance. The crucial point is the difference between epistemic and intrinsic randomness. In the first aspect, randomness does not have a fundamental meaning, in the second, randomness of the individual event is explained, but the detection of high stable regularities remains to be explained. The article addresses the question of entanglement and various aspects of probability theory, including the law of large numbers, arriving at the thesis that many relevant questions are unresolved. A causal description is in quantum mechanics impossible in principle, given its assumptions. In order not to contradict experience, both points of view are necessary, causal and random. This is the state of the research, to return to and start again from.