We could be on the threshold of a scientific revolution. Quantum mechanics is based on unique, finite, and discrete events. General relativity assumes a continuous, curved space-time. Reconciling the two remains the most fundamental unsolved scientific problem left over from the last century. The papers of H. Pierre Noyes collected in this volume reflect one attempt to achieve that unification by replacing the continuum with the bit-string events of computer science. Three principles are used: physics can determine whether two quantities are the same or different; measurement can tell something from nothing; this structure (modeled by binary addition and multiplication) can leave a historical record consisting of a growing universe of bit-strings. This book is specifically addressed to those interested in the foundations of particle physics, relativity, quantum mechanics, physical cosmology and the philosophy of science
We could be on the threshold of a scientific revolution. Quantum mechanics is based on unique, finite, and discrete events. General relativity assumes a continuous, curved space-time. Reconciling the two remains the most fundamental unsolved scientific problem left over from the last century. The papers of H. Pierre Noyes collected in this volume reflect one attempt to achieve that unification by replacing the continuum with the bit-string events of computer science. Three principles are used: physics can determine whether two quantities are the same or different; measurement can tell something from nothing; this structure (modeled by binary addition and multiplication) can leave a historical record consisting of a growing universe of bit-strings. This book is specifically addressed to those interested in the foundations of particle physics, relativity, quantum mechanics, physical cosmology and the philosophy of science
We base our theory of physics and cosmology on the five principles of finiteness, discreteness, finite computability, absolute non- uniqueness, and strict construction. Our modeling methodology starts from the current practice of physics, constructs a self-consistent representation based on the ordering operator calculus and provides rules of correspondence that allow us to test the theory by experiment. We use program universe to construct a growing collection of bit strings whose initial portions (labels) provide the quantum numbers that are conserved in the events defined by the construction. The labels are followed by content strings which are used to construct event-based finite and discrete coordinates. On general grounds such a theory has a limiting velocity, and positions and velocities do not commute. We therefore reconcile quantum mechanics with relativity at an appropriately fundamental stage in the construction. We show that events in different coordinate systems are connected by the appropriate finite and discrete version of the Lorentz transformation, that 3-momentum is conserved in events, and that this conservation law is the same as the requirement that different paths can ''interfere'' only when they differ by an integral number of deBroglie wavelengths. 38 refs., 12 figs., 3 tabs.
We base our theory of physics and cosmology on the five principles of finiteness, discreteness, finite computability, absolute non-uniqueness, and strict construction. Our modeling methodology starts from the current practice of physics, constructs a self-consistent representation based on the ordering operator calculus and provides rules of correspondence that allow us to test the theory by experiment. We. use program universe to construct a growing collection of bit strings whose initial portions (labels) provide the quantum numbers that are conserved in the events defined by the construction. The labels are followed by content strings which a,re used to construct event-based finite and discrete coordinates. On general grounds such a theory has a limiting velocity, and positions and velocities do not commute. We therefore reconcile quantum mechanics with relativity at an appropriately fundamental stage in the construction. We show that events in different coordinate systems are connected by the appropriate finite and discrete version of the Lorentz transformation, that S-momentum is conserved in events, and that this conservation
Conventional theories take the structure of relativistic quantum mechanics as given.The two empirical constants c and ft are connected to the arbitrary historical standards of mass, length and time by various, hopefully self-consistent, means.A third fundamental constant such as e 2 , m t , m p , Mpunck has to be taken from experiment before theoretical "predictions" can be attempted.Our theory [H.P.Noyes and D.O.McGoveran, Physics Essays 2, 76 (1989)] is based on the principles of finiteness, discreteness, finite contputability, absolute non-uniqueness, and strict construction.We construct (rather than postulate) the limiting velocity and discrete eventB, and then derive the Lorentz transformations and the non-commutativity of position and velocity.
In general, a physical theory is based on some fundamental principles concerning space, time, matter, and the laws prescribing how matter is distributed in space and how it evolves in time, and even how spacetime itself changes in response to the changes of matter. The spectrum of the known theories is very diverse, since they are based on different assumptions. Some theories assume that space and time are totally independent, some that they are warped in a continuum named "spacetime", and some even that there are more dimensions than the usual 3+1. Most theories consider that space and time are continuous, but many recent theories consider them to be discrete. Most dynamical laws of fundamental Physics are deterministic, but apparently Quantum Mechanics shows that they may have an indeterministic component. Despite these distinctions between various theories, our intuition and experience tells us that they have a lot in common. In this paper I will try to capture the common features in a single mathematical structure. This is not a Theory of Everything, but only a mathematical structure which is common to most physical theories known so far. We will see that these theories can be obtained as particular cases of this structure, which I will call "world". In particular, the worlds described by the Classical Mechanics, the Theory of Relativity and the Quantum Mechanics are examples of worlds according to this definition, but also some theories attempting to unify gravity and QM, like String Theory. The purpose of this distillation is to provide a mathematical common background to both physical and metaphysical discussions about the various theories of the World.
Twentieth-century physics was shaped by two profound revolutions. The first, Einstein's relativity, banished absolute space and time from the foundations of physics. Motion, Einstein showed, possesses no absolute meaning—only relative motion between observers merits physical description. The second, quantum mechanics, dismantled the classical notion of determinacy. A physical quantity, before measurement, is not merely unknown but genuinely indefinite, suspended in a superposition of possibilities. These two revolutions, for all their splendor, have never spoken a common language. General relativity describes a world of continuous, deterministic geometry; quantum mechanics, a world of discrete, probabilistic events. Their unification—a theory of quantum gravity—remains the central unsolved problem of theoretical physics. We diagnose this impasse not as a technical failure, but as a conceptual incompleteness. The two revolutions, in their original domains, stopped short of questioning a premise both inherited from classical thought: that physical reality, determinacy, and facts themselves are absolute—that they exist independently of the framework through which they are described. Einstein relativized motion but left the existence of spacetime geometry absolute. Quantum mechanics relativized the values of observables but left the fact of an outcome unexplained, consigning it to the mysterious "measurement process." Neither theory asked: in what sense is a fact—that a quantity has a definite value, that an event has occurred, that a physical reality is thus and not otherwise—itself relative to a descriptive framework? This is the question the present work undertakes to answer. In doing so, it completes the program of relativity—not by appending new terms to old equations, but by extending the principle of relativity to its ultimate domain: being itself.
There are several (general) philosophy of physics textbooks on the market.1 An
obvious question to ask at the outset then is: Why another one? In his “Some
Philosophical Aspects of Particle Physics”, Michael Redhead bemoans the common practice of philosophers of science of dealing with examples “which are no
longer of current research interest in science” ((1980), p. 279). This practice is
still common even among many philosophers of physics, and, for the most part,
the available textbooks continue to engage in this practice. Generally, one finds a
little spacetime, a little statistical mechanics, and a little quantum theory. Now,
these are of course the ‘pillars’ of modern physics, so it is what we should expect
to be covered in any textbook on the philosophy of physics worth its salt (and,
indeed, they are well represented in this book). However, the issues that are
dealt with are usually very old fashioned and very limited in scope: ‘spacetime’
means ‘the twins paradox’ (and possibly conventionalism); ‘statistical mechanics’
means ‘time asymmetry’; and ‘quantum theory’ means ‘the measurement problem’. Redhead is surely right that this leads physicists to “regard philosophy of
science as somewhat irrelevant”. Rightly so, too, if this were in fact representative of much of what actually goes on in philosophy of physics. However, the
state of play as represented in philosophy of physics and (some) philosophy of
science journals shows a very different level of engagement, with philosophers
of physics investigating the frontiers of scientific research. This disparity (or the
impression of such) is the raison d’eˆtre for the book you are now reading. The result is an introductory textbook covering those portions of philosophy of physics
research that other textbooks fail to cover, or cover only very briefly or very
simplistically. The three pillars of modern physics-relativity, quantum theory
and statistical mechanics-are still represented, then, but from a more advanced
and contemporary perspective.