Open Journal of Philosophy

The Physical Principles of Natural Philosophy —The Third Discussion on Contradictions between Quantum Mechanics and Relativity Using the Cosmic Origin Principle

Samo Liu

Published Jan 1, 2024• 5 citations

Abstract

The philosophical Framework of modern physics puts forward a philosophical solution to the contradiction between relativity theory and quantum mechanics theory, aiming to break through the restriction of material philosophy on human thought and solve the artificial contradiction generated by material philosophy. This scheme is the physical principle of natural philosophy. Newton discovered the mathematical principles of natural philosophy, he expressed the principles of the universe’s natural philosophy through mathematics, discovering universal gravitation, the mutual perception and motion of material mass. This line of thought continued with the discovery of electromagnetism by Faraday and Maxwell, and quantum mechanics by Einstein, Planck, Born, Bohr, and Dirac many scientists. This represents the completion of the great natural theology of the universe, a credit to these great scientists. However, we have not recognized this as natural theology. Newton and Leibniz jointly discovered absolute space, but due to insufficient scientific information, we lost an opportunity. Today, modern physics has given us another chance; by combining scientific information with the Cosmic origin principles left by our ancestors, we can understand absolute space. Starting with an analysis of the “theoretical contradictions” in quantum mechanics and relativity, reflecting on the concept and essence of physics, and recognizing the Cosmic origin principle is the natural philosophy principle of physics.

DOI: 10.4236/ojpp.2024.144063

Related papers

Reflection on Science Philosophy—Fourth Reflection on the Contradictions between Quantum Mechanics and Relativity Using the Cosmic Origin Principle

Samo Liu

The previous three articles have discussed scientific ontology, resolving the contradictions between quantum mechanics and relativity using the cosmic origin philosophical framework, and interpreting the principles of natural philosophy through physics. Aristotle established material philosophy and material science, relegating the philosophical concepts of cosmic ontology and the cosmic origin to metaphysics and theology. As a result, philosophy was divided into first philosophy and second philosophy as scientific considerations. When material science developed into the ontology of the universe, able to explain the cosmic origin principle, a major issue arose: after 2500 years of development, humanity has only grasped the meaning of “matter.” Yet, what are “energy” and “information”? We still haven’t figured that out. Modern physics has brought both benefits and contradictions to humanity. To resolve these contradictions, we need to redefine the scientific consideration of “philosophy” and its philosophical concepts. This article continues to explore the contradictions between quantum mechanics and relativity using the principles of cosmic origin, reflecting on the basic concepts of philosophy and human thought.

Open Journal of PhilosophyJan 1, 20253 citations

Modern Physical Philosophy Framework —The Second Use of Cosmic Ontology to Resolve the Contradictions of Quantum Mechanics and Relativity

Samo Liu

The previous article “Scientific Cosmological Ontology” discussed that the “theoretical contradictions” between quantum mechanics and relativity may become a joke in the history of human existence. It is believed that human philosophical thinking, from Socrates, Plato, to Aristotle, was a turning point. For more than 2000 years, we have been developing in the direction of material philosophy and material science according to Aristotle, and we have reached the peak of human thinking. Modern physics is a great achievement at this peak. According to the principles of dialectical materialism, this “theoretical contradiction” has opened the door to the original thinking of the universe. We have to go back 2500 years to pick up the great banner of cosmic origin that humanity has abandoned, and human thinking. This article continues to analyze the “theoretical contradictions” between quantum mechanics and relativity, and to design the philosophical framework of modern physics according to the thought of cosmic origin.

Open Journal of PhilosophyJan 1, 20245 citations

The Pinnacle of Science or the End of Scientific Thought? —The Fifth Discussion of the Theoretical Contradictions between Quantum Mechanics and Relativity Using Cosmic Origin Philosophy

Samo Liu

Quantum mechanics and relativity spurred the Third Industrial Revolution, presenting no contradictions in applied engineering but significant theoretical discord. The electronic computer, another major achievement of this era, transformed humanity through the rise of information networks, marking information science as another critical outcome of the revolution. Matter transforms into energy, energy into matter, and mechanics serve as profound conduits for information, even enabling the creation of robots. Modern physics now faces interpretative divides, having seemingly overlooked philosophy and information science’s foundational roles. Human intellect, while reaching new heights through material philosophy, finds itself tangled in confusion. Has science achieved the apex of thought, or does it face an intellectual dead end? This question hints at a revolutionary awakening in human thought. This paper delves deeply into these questions by analyzing and reflecting on the “Scientific Cosmological Ontology,” “Modern Physical Philosophy Framework,” “The Physical Principles of Natural Philosophy,” and “Reflections on the Philosophy of Science.”

Open Journal of PhilosophyJan 1, 20252 citations

Philosophy and the New Physics

Jonathan Powers

First Published in 1982 Philosophy and the New Physics is a compact and yet remarkably rich excursion through the history of physics from Newtonian mechanics to quantum physics. The theory of relativity, quantum mechanics and ideas about the ‘fundamental constituents’ of matter have attracted a great deal of philosophical comment. Indeed, the originators of some of these theories thought they were solving philosophical problems as well as scientific ones. Classical physics is often portrayed as epitomizing ‘mechanistic materialism’, and the revolution in modern physics is variously claimed to vindicate ‘logical positivism’, ‘operationalism’, ‘organicism’, ‘dialectical materialism’ and ‘Buddhist metaphysics’. In this book Jonathan Powers criticizes all of these claims and argues that such varied and conflicting interpretations are possible because of ineradicable elements of conventionality in scientific theories. This is a must read for scholars and researchers of philosophy of science and philosophy in general.

Routledge eBooksJul 10, 20233 citations

Natural Philosophical Critique of Quantum Mechanics

H. J. Spencer

This paper re-opens the debate on the failure of quantum mechanics to provide an understandable view of micro-reality. A critique is offered of the commonly accepted ‘Copenhagen Interpretation’ of a theory that is only a mathematical approach to the level of reality characterized by atoms and electrons. This critique is based on the oldest approach to thinking about nature for over 2500 years, known as Natural Philosophy. Quantum mechanics (QM) was developed over the first quarter of the 20th Century, when scientists were enthralled by a new philosophy known as Positivism, whose foundations were based on the assumption that material objects exist only when measured by humans – This central assumption conflates epistemology (knowledge) with ontology (existence). The present critique rejects this human-centered view of reality by assuming material reality has existed long before (and will persist long after) human beings (“Realism”). The defensive view that the micro-world is too different to understand using regular thinking (and only a mathematical approach is possible) is rejected totally. At least 12 earlier QM interpretations are critically analyzed, indicating the broad interest in “what does QM mean?” The standard theory of quantum mechanics is thus constructed on only how the micro-world appears to macro measurements - as such, it cannot offer any view of how the foundations of the world are acting when humans are not observing it - this has generated almost 100 years of confusion and contradiction at the very heart of physics. Significantly, we live in a world that is not being measured by scientists but is interacting with itself and with us. QM has failed to provide explanations: only recipes (meaningless equations), not insights. Physics has returned to the pre-Newtonian world of Ptolemaic phenomenology: only verifiable numbers without real understanding. The focus needs to be on an explicit linkage between the micro-world, when left to itself, and our mental models of this sphere of material reality, via the mechanism of measurement. This limits the role of measurement to confirming our mental models of reality but never confusing these with a direct image of ‘the thing in itself’. This implies a deep divide between reality and appearances. This paper proposes that it is the attempt to preserve continuum mathematics (especially calculus), which drives much of the mystery and confusion behind all attempts to understand quantum mechanics. The introduction of discrete mathematics is proposed to help analyze the discrete interactions between the quintessential quantum objects: the electrons and their novel properties. Additionally, several hidden major assumptions have been present in Classical Mechanics (represented by continuum mathematics) since its inception by Newton that are blocking progress and understanding of quantum mechanics. A related paper demonstrates that it is possible to create a point-particle theory of electrons that explains all their peculiar (and ‘paradoxical’) behavior without introducing the continuum mathematical ideas of fields or waves. * Surrey, B.C. Canada (604) 542-2299 spsi99@telus.net Version 1.195 10-07-2016 Begun 23-06-2008 {pp. 80, 70.4 Kw; 800 KB}

Dec 1, 20160 citations

Classical Physics Versus Quantum Physics: an Overview

Hardev Singh Virk

Newtonian mechanics is the foundation of Classical Physics. Newton’s mechanics, Thermodynamics, Wave theory of Optics and Maxwell’s electromagnetic theory belong to regime of Classical Physics and can be used to explain a wide range of phenomena in the Universe at macroscopic scale. These theories fail spectacularly when applied to phenomenain the atomic and nuclear regime, for example, proton-atom scattering or the flow of electrons in a semiconductor. Quantum mechanics is the most successful scientific theory that has ever been created and it has completely changed our view of the world. The failure of Classical Physics was highlighted by black body radiation and photoelectric effect. Max Planck and Albert Einstein provided explanations of both phenomena based on quantum hypothesis and are thus considered founders of Quantum Physics. The origin of quantum mechanics goes back to the mid-1920s.It was formulated first as matrix mechanics by Werner Heisenberg, Max Born and Pascual Jordan; then as wave mechanics by Louis de Broglie and Erwin Schrödinger; and later on asquantum statistics of subatomic particles by Fermi-Dirac and Bose-Einstein. Combining relativistic mechanics with quantum mechanics, Dirac formulated his relativistic quantum mechanics during 1930s. Uncertainty Principle is thecornerstone of Quantum Physics. The role of randomness in microscopic physical processes shatters the myth that the universe is deterministic. Quantum world is unpredictable in the classical sense and demolishes the idea of an objective universe. The Copenhagen interpretation remains the quantum mechanical formalism that is currently most widely accepted amongst physicists.Quantum theories support cosmic spirit pervading the cosmos and inter – relationship of individuals in the world society. Quantum philosophy is holistic and is going to revolutionize our world-view.

OmniScience A Multi-disciplinary JournalAug 1, 20142 citations