Richard Feynman wrote in [1]: "The next great era of human intelligence awakening may create a methodology for understanding the qualitative content of equations". However, he did not say how this goal could be achieved. In this paper, this goal was achieved by adopting the fundamental ideas of Descartes' scientific philosophy. That is, the idea that from the very beginning the equation of algebra and arithmetic was taken as the basis of the theory of thought. Then, when the problems of geometry, kinematics, physics are solved...And so that on this way the possibilities of the method of separation of variables and the method of abolition of variables were correctly used. The results which could be obtained on this way just turned out to be the results inherent for quantum geometry, quantum kinematics, quantum physics.... That is results on the basis of which it was really possible to put in order intellectual achievements of mankind.
Richard Feynman wrote in [1]: "The next great era of human intelligence awakening may create a methodology for understanding the qualitative content of equations". However, he did not say how this goal could be achieved. In this paper, this goal was achieved by adopting the fundamental ideas of Descartes' scientific philosophy. That is, the idea that from the very beginning the equation of algebra and arithmetic was taken as the basis of the theory of thought. Then, when the problems of geometry, kinematics, physics are solved...And so that on this way the possibilities of the method of separation of variables and the method of abolition of variables were correctly used. The results which could be obtained on this way just turned out to be the results inherent for quantum geometry, quantum kinematics, quantum physics.... That is results on the basis of which it was really possible to put in order intellectual achievements of mankind.
As we know the main results of quantum physics in 1900 Planck began to obtain mainly because of the need to describe the experimental data. Therefore, it further became necessary to obtain theoretical justifications for these results. This means to obtain proofs of these results on the basis of the basic equations of theoretical physics, i.e. equations that are obtained on the way where the right choice of results is made performing the role of the basis of the theory of thought. As is known, these problems began to be solved, taking as a basis the possibilities of the following new ideas of Bohr. That quantum physics should be considered as a generalization of classical physics. But as we know, this path led to the results of matrix mechanics. Results for which such contradiction as non-commutativity of multiplication is inherent. In this paper for obtaining proofs for the results of Planck's quantum physics the fundamental ideas in the field of scientific philosophy were taken as a basis. That is philosophy where from the very beginning for the basis of the theory of thinking the possibilities of equations of algebra and arithmetic are accepted.
It is well known that in 1900, after Planck obtained the basic equation of quantum theory, there came a moment when it became necessary to obtain a theoretical justification of this equation. In 1911, based on the possibility of Gibbs' canonical distribution function (CDF), he solved this problem partially: he obtained a justification for the second multiplier of his equation. Then on the basis of the analysis of these results he stated that henceforth in the role of the basic concept of quantum theory there is a necessity to accept the possibility of the concept of the quantum of action. However, Poincaré at the same congress criticized these new ideas. For he recognized the value of the idea of the quantum of action in solving only frequent problems. Therefore, he further, in his article entitled "On the Theory of Quanta", made the following conclusion: in his opinion, the main essence of quantum theory is connected with the concept of the quantum of energy [1]. Thus, he wanted to say that in the future the main results of Planck's quantum theory have the possibility to substantiate only if the possibility of the concept of energy quantum is taken as more general. In this paper an attempt is made to prove that it is really so.
This overview introduces the book’s aim of showing how quantum theory marks a radical break from previous scientific theorizing: We are warranted in accepting the fundamental status within contemporary physics of a theory that posits no new physical entities or magnitudes of its own. By contrast with existing interpretations that attempt to say how the world could possibly be the way quantum theory says it is, a pragmatist takes understanding quantum theory to be a matter of knowing how it is applied, and how the theory’s various elements function in these applications. So Part I of the book offers a simple, self-contained presentation of quantum theory, emphasizing applications; while Part II says why the quantum revolution matters for philosophy. Coming to terms with the quantum revolution involves adopting views of scientific theorizing, probability, causation, explanation, objectivity, meaning, and fundamentality that philosophers should have arrived at without its prompting.
Philosophy is dissolved into quantum philosophy, which is really not the philosophy created by the hitherto existing human thought but its dissociation into ‘constituent’ aspects/processes/conversions such as time, space, matter, energy, measure, etc. Quantum world is a world of constant transformations, which is the only constant, from the point of view of the worldview. The quantum world leads to a rearrangement of the subject/object relationship. The nature of the reality or of what is being observed is qualitatively different from the one in the tangible world. When one applies quantum theory to the electrodynamics of “elementary” particles such as electrons, protons, etc. internal inconsistencies arise in theory. These inconsistencies are connected with the prediction of infinite values for values for various physical properties e.g. mass and charge of the electron.
We have now concluded our summary of the findings of modern physics, and may turn to consider how these findings affect the practical problems of philosophy and of everyday life. But let us first recapitulate the conclusions we have reached in our scientific discussion. Recapitulation Because we are human beings and not mere animals, we try to discover as much as we can about the world in which our lives are cast. We have seen that there is only one method of gaining such knowledge—the method of science, which consists in a direct questioning of nature by observation and experiment. The first thing we learn from such questioning is that the world is rational; its happenings are not determined by caprice but by law. There exists what we have called a ‘pattern of events’, and the primary aim of physical science is the discovery of this pattern. This, as we have seen, will be capable of description only in mathematical terms. The new quantum theory explained in the preceding chapter has provided a mathematical description of the pattern of events which is believed to be complete and perfect. For it enables us—in principle at least—to predict every possible phenomenon of physics, and not one of its predictions has so far proved to be wrong. In a sense, then, we might say that theoretical physics has achieved the main purpose of its being, and that nothing remains but to work out the details.
All men by nature desire to know, states Aristotle in the famous first sentence of his Metaphysics. Knowledge about fundamental particles and interactions, that is, knowledge about the deepest aspects of matter, is certainly high if not top on the priority list, not only for physicists and philosophers. The goal of the present book is to contribute to this knowledge by going beyond the usual presentations of quantum field theory in physics textbooks, both in mathematical approach and by critical reflections inspired by epistemology, that is, by the branch of philosophy also referred to as the theory of knowledge. Hopefully, the present book motivates physicists to appreciate philosophical ideas. Epistemology and the philosophy of the evolution of science often seem to lag behind science and to describe the developments a posteriori. As philosophy here has a profound influence on the actual shaping of an image of fundamental particles and their interactions, our development should stimulate the curiosity and imagination of physicists. This book can be used as a textbook on quantum field theory for students of physics or as a monograph for philosophers and physicists interested in the epistemological foundations of particle physics. The benefits of an approach resting on philosophical foundations is twofold: the reader is stimulated to critical thinking and the entire story flows very naturally, thus removing all the mysteries from quantum field theory.