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

Exceptionality Exclusion: Bridge between Quantization and Relativity above the Stormy Stream of Pseudo-Scientific Speculation

Stanislav Ordin

Published Oct 24, 2024• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

The work on correcting the historically layered errors of Quantum Theory,” in addition to its specific corrections, provided both an understanding of the reasons for their occurrence and why they were canonized. Also, it became obvious that the Scientific Misconceptions, both included in the modern “Quantum Theory” and in Einstein’s SRT, have a General Character. Therefore, the Unified Theory, as has now become obvious, can and, initially, must be built on the General INVARIANTS of Quantization and the Principle of Relativity, while each of the noted Theories comes from the use, without forming an orthogonal frame, of an individual non-invariant set of orthos, plugging the “holes of theories” with EXCLUSIVITIES. This work is devoted to their identification and elimination, which will help correct both the FOUNDATIONS of the Theory of Relativity and will complement the corrections of the FOUNDATIONS of Quantization.

DOI
10.1201/9781003570615-27

Related papers

Exceptionality Exclusion: Bridging Quantization and Relativity

Stanislav Ordin

The work on correcting the historically layered errors of Quantum Theory," in addition to its specific corrections, provided both an understanding of the reasons for their occurrence and why they were canonized. And, also, it became obvious that the Scientific Misconceptions, both included in the modern "Quantum Theory" and in Einstein's SRT, have a General Character. Therefore, the Unified Theory, as has now become obvious, can and, initially, must be built on the General INVARIANTS of Quantization and the Principle of Relativity, while each of the noted Theories proceeds from the use of an individual non-invariant set of orts, plugging the "holes of theories" with EXCLUSIVITIES. This work is devoted to their identification and elimination, which will help correct both the FOUNDATIONS of the Theory of Relativity and will complement the corrections of the FOUNDATIONS of Quantization.

Global Journal of Human Social Science•Mar 29, 2024•0 citations

Simplifying the equations of relativistic quantum mechanics

Luis Grave de Peralta

I n the early 20th century, the groundbreaking theories of quantum mechanics and special relativity emerged at roughly the same time.At first, both theories appeared to be entirely incompatible with each other.While the quantum equations written out by Erwin Schrödinger and Wolfgang Pauli dealt with the behaviours of electrons, atoms, and molecules moving at speeds encountered in classical physics, the rules of special relativity first imagined by Albert Einstein described the behaviour of matter moving at close to the speed of light.Initially, this apparent clash of theories presented a crisis in physics.However, in the late 1920s, further theoretical work carried out by physicists including Paul Dirac, Oskar Klein, and Walter Gordon culminated in a new set of equations, which proved definitively that quantum mechanics and special relativity are compatible with each other after all. An educational challengeYet with this groundbreaking discovery came an entirely new problem.In adding a new layer of complexity to the equations of non-relativistic quantum mechanics, the more complete theories of relativistic

Research Features•Jan 1, 2023•0 citations

Seeing Double

Peter D. Pešić

The unknown history of surveillance in relation to changing systems of representation and visual arts practice. The separateness and connection of individuals is perhaps the central question of human life: What, exactly, is my individuality? To what degree is it unique? To what degree can it be shared, and how? To the many philosophical and literary speculations about these topics over time, modern science has added the curious twist of quantum theory, which requires that the elementary particles of which everything consists have no individuality at all. All aspects of chemistry depend on this lack of individuality, as do many branches of physics. From where, then, does our individuality come? In Seeing Double, Peter Pesic invites readers to explore this intriguing set of questions. He draws on literary and historical examples that open the mind (from Homer to Martin Guerre to Kafka), philosophical analyses that have helped to make our thinking and speech more precise, and scientific work that has enabled us to characterize the phenomena of nature. Though he does not try to be all-inclusive, Pesic presents a broad range of ideas, building toward a specific point of view: that the crux of modern quantum theory is its clash with our ordinary concept of individuality. This represents a departure from the usual understanding of quantum theory. Pesic argues that what is bizarre about quantum theory becomes more intelligible as we reconsider what we mean by individuality and identity in ordinary experience. In turn, quantum identity opens a new perspective on us.

The MIT Press eBooks•Feb 1, 2002•9 citations

Better Unification for Physics in General Through Quantum Mechanics in Particular

Cynthia Kolb Whitney

IntroductionPhysics has always had several different domains of application in on-going development, and physicists have always striven for unification among its different domains.Unification is usually achieved through development of so-called 'covering theories'.In the nineteenth century, the stunning example was Maxwell's Electrodynamics (MED), which unified electricity and magnetism as one domain of theory.Another major domain of theory then present was Newton's Mechanics (NM), which in the eighteenth century had really launched modern physics as a mathematical discipline.At the turn of the twentieth century, NM and MED were well in place, and were fulfilling many technologically important requirements.But there seemed to be an incompatibility between them.The problem concerned their invariance with respect to choice of reference frame: NM exhibited invariance if the allowed reference frames were all connected through Galilean transformations, whereas MED exhibited invariance if the allowed reference frames were all connected through Lorentz transformations.It looked as though one of these two theories must be more nearly correct than the other, but it was not clear which one was the better one.That problem seemed resolved with the advent of Einstein's Special Relativity Theory (SRT).SRT was believed to capture the true meaning of MED concerning the behavior of light signals, and SRT was certainly an endorsement of Lorentz transformation, so SRT was believed to offer the one possible revision of NM that could make mechanics fully consistent with MED.But meanwhile, new phenomena were being discovered at the micro scale of physics, and they often seemed inexplicable with any known theory, whether NM, SRT, or MED.These were phenomena suggesting quantization of light, quantized atomic states, atomic, molecular and crystal structures, radioactivity, etc.So at almost the same time as one problem seemed to be resolved, other problems were emerging.Since the earlier situation between NM and MED had demanded that Physics allow two seemingly discordant theories to co-exist until some good argument could replace one of them, the situation then presented by the new phenomena being discovered naturally invited the development of another potentially discordant theory: Quantum Mechanics (QM).The discovery of the photoelectric effect, and the introduction of the idea of the photon, initiated QM.Almost immediately, QM was developed to handle the Hydrogen atom, and the ground state thereof, the stability of which was thought to be impossible with MED.www.intechopen.

InTech eBooks•Feb 24, 2012•2 citations

Theory of Relativity or Quantum Mechanics

Valentin Malinov

Why scientists stating that the Theory of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics they are not compatible, and one of them probably is wrong?

•Dec 1, 2020•0 citations

Quantum Mechanics versus Special Relativity: A forgotten conflict

Rafael Andrés Alemañ Berenguer

Despite the widespread assumptions on the compatibility between non-relativistic quantum mechanics and special relativity, there still remains a considerable amount of unresolved problems to which few authors explicitly pay attention. Most of them involve the aim of coherently achieving a relativistic description of quantum collapses and quantum entanglements. These processes seem to challenge our present picture of the physical world in terms of space-time structures.

•Nov 1, 2008•1 citation
The work on correcting the historically layered errors of Quantum Theory,” in addition to its specific corrections, provided both an understanding of the reasons for their occurrence and why they were canonized. Also, it became obvious that the Scientific Misconceptions, both included in the modern “Quantum Theory” and in Einstein’s SRT, have a General Character. Therefore, the Unified Theory, as has now become obvious, can and, initially, must be built on the General INVARIANTS of Quantization and the Principle of Relativity, while each of the noted Theories comes from the use, without forming an orthogonal frame, of an individual non-invariant set of orthos, plugging the “holes of theories” with EXCLUSIVITIES. This work is devoted to their identification and elimination, which will help correct both the FOUNDATIONS of the Theory of Relativity and will complement the corrections of the FOUNDATIONS of Quantization.
The work on correcting the historically layered errors of Quantum Theory," in addition to its specific corrections, provided both an understanding of the reasons for their occurrence and why they were canonized. And, also, it became obvious that the Scientific Misconceptions, both included in the modern "Quantum Theory" and in Einstein's SRT, have a General Character. Therefore, the Unified Theory, as has now become obvious, can and, initially, must be built on the General INVARIANTS of Quantization and the Principle of Relativity, while each of the noted Theories proceeds from the use of an individual non-invariant set of orts, plugging the "holes of theories" with EXCLUSIVITIES. This work is devoted to their identification and elimination, which will help correct both the FOUNDATIONS of the Theory of Relativity and will complement the corrections of the FOUNDATIONS of Quantization.
I n the early 20th century, the groundbreaking theories of quantum mechanics and special relativity emerged at roughly the same time.At first, both theories appeared to be entirely incompatible with each other.While the quantum equations written out by Erwin Schrödinger and Wolfgang Pauli dealt with the behaviours of electrons, atoms, and molecules moving at speeds encountered in classical physics, the rules of special relativity first imagined by Albert Einstein described the behaviour of matter moving at close to the speed of light.Initially, this apparent clash of theories presented a crisis in physics.However, in the late 1920s, further theoretical work carried out by physicists including Paul Dirac, Oskar Klein, and Walter Gordon culminated in a new set of equations, which proved definitively that quantum mechanics and special relativity are compatible with each other after all. An educational challengeYet with this groundbreaking discovery came an entirely new problem.In adding a new layer of complexity to the equations of non-relativistic quantum mechanics, the more complete theories of relativistic
The unknown history of surveillance in relation to changing systems of representation and visual arts practice. The separateness and connection of individuals is perhaps the central question of human life: What, exactly, is my individuality? To what degree is it unique? To what degree can it be shared, and how? To the many philosophical and literary speculations about these topics over time, modern science has added the curious twist of quantum theory, which requires that the elementary particles of which everything consists have no individuality at all. All aspects of chemistry depend on this lack of individuality, as do many branches of physics. From where, then, does our individuality come? In Seeing Double, Peter Pesic invites readers to explore this intriguing set of questions. He draws on literary and historical examples that open the mind (from Homer to Martin Guerre to Kafka), philosophical analyses that have helped to make our thinking and speech more precise, and scientific work that has enabled us to characterize the phenomena of nature. Though he does not try to be all-inclusive, Pesic presents a broad range of ideas, building toward a specific point of view: that the crux of modern quantum theory is its clash with our ordinary concept of individuality. This represents a departure from the usual understanding of quantum theory. Pesic argues that what is bizarre about quantum theory becomes more intelligible as we reconsider what we mean by individuality and identity in ordinary experience. In turn, quantum identity opens a new perspective on us.
IntroductionPhysics has always had several different domains of application in on-going development, and physicists have always striven for unification among its different domains.Unification is usually achieved through development of so-called 'covering theories'.In the nineteenth century, the stunning example was Maxwell's Electrodynamics (MED), which unified electricity and magnetism as one domain of theory.Another major domain of theory then present was Newton's Mechanics (NM), which in the eighteenth century had really launched modern physics as a mathematical discipline.At the turn of the twentieth century, NM and MED were well in place, and were fulfilling many technologically important requirements.But there seemed to be an incompatibility between them.The problem concerned their invariance with respect to choice of reference frame: NM exhibited invariance if the allowed reference frames were all connected through Galilean transformations, whereas MED exhibited invariance if the allowed reference frames were all connected through Lorentz transformations.It looked as though one of these two theories must be more nearly correct than the other, but it was not clear which one was the better one.That problem seemed resolved with the advent of Einstein's Special Relativity Theory (SRT).SRT was believed to capture the true meaning of MED concerning the behavior of light signals, and SRT was certainly an endorsement of Lorentz transformation, so SRT was believed to offer the one possible revision of NM that could make mechanics fully consistent with MED.But meanwhile, new phenomena were being discovered at the micro scale of physics, and they often seemed inexplicable with any known theory, whether NM, SRT, or MED.These were phenomena suggesting quantization of light, quantized atomic states, atomic, molecular and crystal structures, radioactivity, etc.So at almost the same time as one problem seemed to be resolved, other problems were emerging.Since the earlier situation between NM and MED had demanded that Physics allow two seemingly discordant theories to co-exist until some good argument could replace one of them, the situation then presented by the new phenomena being discovered naturally invited the development of another potentially discordant theory: Quantum Mechanics (QM).The discovery of the photoelectric effect, and the introduction of the idea of the photon, initiated QM.Almost immediately, QM was developed to handle the Hydrogen atom, and the ground state thereof, the stability of which was thought to be impossible with MED.www.intechopen.