The title has changed because the objective has also changed. The purpose of earlier versions was to clarify Einstein’s intent when he formulated his quantum theory of radiation: why choose statistical methods to derive Planck’s law, why emphasize momentum, and why are both important to a “final theory”. We find that Einstein’s methods have the common property that they are formulated in continuous space and time. It means that the problem of the quantum-classical divide does not exist in any of his theories, and that his results are fully consistent in the presence of non-linear gravitational fields. To see if his unconventional methods can provide the insights necessary to resolve the long-standing problem of wave function collapse we will compare how the two versions interpret causality. We show that Gödel’s incompleteness theorem is key to a reinterpretation of wave function collapse.
The title has changed because the objective has also changed. The purpose of earlier versions was to clarify Einstein’s intent when he formulated his quantum theory of radiation: why choose statistical methods to derive Planck’s law, why emphasize momentum, and why are both important to a “final theory”. We find that Einstein’s methods have the common property that they are formulated in continuous space and time. It means that the problem of the quantum-classical divide does not exist in any of his theories, and that his results are fully consistent in the presence of non-linear gravitational fields. To see if his unconventional methods can provide the insights necessary to resolve the long-standing problem of wave function collapse we will compare how the two versions interpret causality. We show that Gödel’s incompleteness theorem is key to a reinterpretation of wave function collapse.
The title has changed because the objective has also changed. The purpose of earlier versions was to clarify Einstein’s intent when he formulated his quantum theory of radiation: why choose statistical methods to derive Planck’s law, why emphasize momentum, and why are both important to a “final theory”. We find that Einstein’s methods have the common property that they are formulated statistically in continuous space and time. It means that the problem of the quantum-classical divide does not exist in any of his theories, and that his results are fully consistent in the presence of non-linear gravitational fields. To see if his unconventional methods can provide the insights necessary to resolve the long-standing problem of wave function collapse we will compare how the two versions interpret causality. We show that Gödel’s incompleteness theorem is key to resolving wave function collapse.
We present an ontological and dynamic derivation of wave function collapse within the context of General Relativity formulated as a Quantum Theory (GRQT), a formulation that maintains ontological realism and conceptual continuity with General Relativity. Starting exclusively from the discrete geometric structure of spacetime and its fundamental elastic properties, we demonstrate that collapse constitutes neither an additional postulate of quantum mechanics nor an external phenomenological effect, but emerges as a necessary consequence of the requirement for geometric consistency in the temporal update of the causal lattice. We show that quantum superpositions of massive systems imply geometric bifurcations of spacetime, associated with incompatible metrics in the transition between successive simultaneity slices. The energy identified in Objective Reduction theories as gravitational self-interaction energy is reinterpreted, in GRQT, as the elastic deformation energy of the lattice, governed by the fundamental geometric impedance α. We derive a quantitative criterion for the viability of temporal evolution and a closed-form expression for the characteristic collapse time, without introducing free parameters. Wave function collapse thus arises as the physical process by which spacetime eliminates geometric ambiguities incompatible with the unique definition of the subsequent slice, preserving the topological continuity of the causal manifold. The boundary between quantum and classical regimes becomes quantitative and derived, resolving the measurement problem in strictly geometric terms. The formulation maintains ontological realism, conceptual continuity with General Relativity, and provides explicit experimental predictions in mesoscopic regimes.
We investigate the meaning of the wave function by analyzing the mass and charge density distributions of a quantum system. According to protective measurement, a charged quantum system has effective mass and charge density distributing in space, proportional to the square of the absolute value of its wave function. In a realistic interpretation, the wave function of a quantum system can be taken as a description of either a physical field or the ergodic motion of a particle. The essential difference between a field and the ergodic motion of a particle lies in the property of simultaneity; a field exists throughout space simultaneously, whereas the ergodic motion of a particle exists throughout space in a time‐divided way. If the wave function is a physical field, then the mass and charge density will be distributed in space simultaneously for a charged quantum system, and thus there will exist gravitational and electrostatic self‐interactions of its wave function. This not only violates the superposition principle of quantum mechanics but also contradicts experimental observations. Thus the wave function cannot be a description of a physical field but be a description of the ergodic motion of a particle. For the later there is only a localized particle with mass and charge at every instant, and thus there will not exist any self‐interaction for the wave function. It is further argued that the classical ergodic models, which assume continuous motion of particles, cannot be consistent with quantum mechanics. Based on the negative result, we suggest that the wave function is a description of the quantum motion of particles, which is random and discontinuous in nature. On this interpretation, the square of the absolute value of the wave function not only gives the probability of the particle being found in certain locations, but also gives the probability of the particle being there. The suggested new interpretation of the wave function provides a natural realistic alternative to the orthodox interpretation, and it also implies that the de Broglie‐Bohm theory and many‐worlds interpretation are wrong and the dynamical collapse theories are in the right direction by admitting wavefunction collapse.
Is often claimed that Einstein is wrong about quantum mechanics. However, when compared with respect to theoretical foundations rather than experimental results Einstein’s theories are found to be superior. Although quantum mechanics correctly predicts what it is possible to observe (the emissions) it ignores the other half of natural phenomena, what cannot be observed (the absorptions), thereby violating the conservation laws. By describing only one-half of quantum mechanics conceptual difficulties such as wave function collapse, infinite paths, and inscrutable mathematics seem to appear out of nowhere. The deficiencies are corrected by introducing Hamilton’s principle S = ∫ Ldt and applying the methods of quantum field theory to derive relativistic equations of motion. The calculus of variations is used to show that the wave function represents an incomplete equation of motion because it equals twice the allowable action minimum.
At present, there are two possible, and equally plausible, explanations for the physics of quantum measurement. The first explanation, known as the many-worlds interpretation, does not require any modification of quantum mechanics, and asserts that at the time of measurement the Universe splits into many branches, one branch for every possible alternative. The various branches do not interfere with each other because of decoherence, thus providing a picture broadly consistent with the observed Universe. The second explanation, which requires quantum mechanics to be modified from its presently known form, is that at the time of measurement the wave-function collapses into one of the possible alternatives. The two explanations are mutually exclusive, and up until now, no theoretical reasoning has been put forward to choose one explanation over the other. In this article, we provide an argument which implies that the collapse interpretation is favored over the many-worlds interpretation. Our starting point is the assertion (which we justify) that there ought to exist a reformulation of quantum mechanics which does not refer to a classical spacetime manifold. The need for such a reformulation implies that quantum theory becomes non-linear on the Planck mass/energy scale. Standard linear quantum mechanics is an approximation to this non-linear theory, valid at energy scales much smaller than the Planck scale. Using ideas based on noncommutative | >=
Abstract When about half a century ago the concept of universal spontaneous collapse of the wave function was conceived it was an attempt to alter standard non-relativistic quantum physics. As such, it was largely ignored by relativistic field theory and quantum gravity communities. A central motivation of spontaneous collapse community has been to replace the standard collapse-by-measurement that annoyed many. With few exceptions, it did not annoy the field theory and quantum gravity communities. Concept of certain general-relativity-related universal irreversibility in quantum field theory had been initiated very long ago by Wheeler, Hawking and a few others independently from the concept of spontaneous collapse. Lately the two concepts started to converge and support each other.