Coherence and Quantum Mechanics

Miguel Orszag

Prislac, Thomas, Echo, AI

Appendix Q – Quantum Mechanics and GUFT: A Structural Mapping of Coherence Fields Q.1. Scope and Caution Quantum mechanics (QM) is one of the most precisely tested scientific theories in history. Standard QM and quantum field theory (QFT) correctly describe an enormous range of phenomena, from atomic spectra to semiconductor devices to superconducting qubits. We are not proposing a new physics theory or “fixing” quantum mechanics. Instead, this appendix asks a narrower, safer question: How can the core structures of quantum theory—states, coherence, entanglement, measurement, decoherence—be mapped into the GUFT framework of coherence fields (Ψ = E × T, ΔS, etc.) in a way that is faithful to physics and conceptually useful? We proceed with three strict constraints: We take standard QM/QFT (as found in textbooks and reviewed sources) as non-negotiable. We treat GUFT as a descriptive overlay: a way to talk about structure and information, not an alternative dynamics. Where we draw analogies (e.g., empathy ↔ correlation), we note they are structural, not literal or magical.

Dirk John Pons, Arion Pons, Ariel M. Pons +1 more

Quantum mechanics (QM) has the problem of lacking a coherent conceptual foundation, even if its quantitative algorithms are functionally adequate. This paper appraises the conceptual logic beneath quantum mechanics, using as the point of reference a novel alternative conceptual framework called the cordus conjecture. If the cordus conjecture is correct then the comparison suggests that quantum mechanics is conceptually fallacious in several areas: (1) Particles need not be zero-dimensional points after all. (2) Bell�s theorem is refuted as being not universally applicable, and the principle of locality also fails. (3) The wavefunction is a mathematical approximation of a deeper reality, and superposition is not a physical state. (4) Superposition confounds positional and causal (temporal) variability, and this causes the weirdness of the QM interpretations. (5) Cordus identifies the factors that cause decoherence and (6) explains why quantum mechanics does not scale up to macroscopic objects. (7) It is fallacious to consider fields and particles as independent phenomena. Instead they are closely coupled in the cordus, and this explains the measurement context. Several core principles of QM are thereby refuted. The paradox of Schr�dinger�s Cat is explained as an artefact of these flawed premises. The paper also explains why the mathematical machinery of quantum mechanics is a reasonable approximation to reality, even if the concepts are not. The mathematics works, at least within a certain scale-range where: (a) things look like particles and the proposed cordus structure is not evident (i.e. not too small) and (b) where body-coherence is attainable (i.e. not too large). Outside of that range quantum mechanics seems neither conceptually nor mathematically relevant. The same analysis predicts QM is unlikely to scale down to the next deeper level of physics. The implications are that QM is profoundly deficient in its conceptual foundations, and is only an approximation of a deeper and more logically consistent mechanics.

Miguel Orszag

James R F SUTTON

GQR 7: Tunnelling Rates, Speeds, and Flux Dynamics The Gated Quantum Resonator (GQR) framework is introduced to formalize deviations from textbook quantum-mechanical (QM) tunnelling relations. GQR maps the classical exponential decay law to a dynamic band of rates by incorporating aperture control, field coupling, and coherence feedback. Numerical sweeps (Amp = 0–3) for electrons and protons demonstrate that this coherent gating mechanism can yield order-of-magnitude rate increases in the enzymatic tunnelling window (0.8–1.2 Å). This shows that GQR can provide both suppression and enhancement to tunnelling rates.