Cover Note This document is offered in a constructive spirit as a conceptual bridge between established frameworks. It does not propose a replacement of General Relativity or Quantum Mechanics, nor does it introduce new formal equations. Instead, it suggests that several long-standing tensions arise from a shared observational assumption regarding time and space. By introducing a stratified propagation perspective and distinguishing propagation-time (Kairos time) from measured linear time, the paper aims to show how relativistic geometry and quantum behavior may be understood as complementary descriptions at different resolutions of the same underlying process. The intent is to reduce conceptual friction, not to challenge existing results, and to provide a neutral framework that may help orient future theoretical and experimental work.
Cover Note This document is offered in a constructive spirit as a conceptual bridge between established frameworks. It does not propose a replacement of General Relativity or Quantum Mechanics, nor does it introduce new formal equations. Instead, it suggests that several long-standing tensions arise from a shared observational assumption regarding time and space. By introducing a stratified propagation perspective and distinguishing propagation-time (Kairos time) from measured linear time, the paper aims to show how relativistic geometry and quantum behavior may be understood as complementary descriptions at different resolutions of the same underlying process. The intent is to reduce conceptual friction, not to challenge existing results, and to provide a neutral framework that may help orient future theoretical and experimental work.
Cover Note This document is offered in a constructive spirit as a conceptual bridge between established frameworks. It does not propose a replacement of General Relativity or Quantum Mechanics, nor does it introduce new formal equations. Instead, it suggests that several long-standing tensions arise from a shared observational assumption regarding time and space. By introducing a stratified propagation perspective and distinguishing propagation-time (Kairos time) from measured linear time, the paper aims to show how relativistic geometry and quantum behavior may be understood as complementary descriptions at different resolutions of the same underlying process. The intent is to reduce conceptual friction, not to challenge existing results, and to provide a neutral framework that may help orient future theoretical and experimental work.
Abstract Quantum mechanics and relativity are two of the most successful theoretical frameworks in modern physics, yet their conceptual foundations remain difficult to reconcile at the deepest level. Quantum theory describes physical systems through states, observables, probabilities, measurement contexts, superposition, entanglement, and nonclassical correlations. Relativity describes physical processes through space-time structure, causal order, invariant physical law, observer-dependent decomposition of time and space, and constraints on signal propagation. This article examines the conceptual relationship between quantum measurement, relativistic causality, and space-time description. The purpose is not to present a mathematical unification but to analyze how the two frameworks organize physical explanation differently and where their interpretive tensions arise. Special attention is given to the measurement problem, the status of quantum states, the role of observers and reference frames, the meaning of locality, the distinction between correlation and causal influence, and the challenge of describing quantum processes without privileging a single global time. The article argues that many apparent conflicts between quantum theory and relativity result from importing classical intuitions into domains where they no longer apply. Quantum entanglement does not permit controllable faster-than-light communication, yet it challenges classical separability. Relativity forbids superluminal signaling, yet it does not require that all physically meaningful correlations be reducible to local classical properties. Measurement introduces another difficulty because standard quantum theory often describes state update in a way that appears instantaneous, while relativistic space-time does not provide a universal present. The discussion develops a conceptual framework in which quantum measurement is treated as a physical interaction, relativistic causality as a constraint on operational influence, and space-time description as an organizing structure for events rather than a simple background stage. This analysis is relevant for quantum field theory, quantum information, relativistic quantum foundations, and future approaches to quantum gravity.
Abstract The conceptual unification of quantum mechanics and relativity remains one of the central challenges of modern theoretical physics. While quantum theory successfully describes microscopic phenomena through probabilistic wave dynamics and field quantization, relativity establishes the geometric structure of space-time and the causal organization of physical events. Despite extensive progress in quantum field theory and relativistic quantum frameworks, foundational tensions persist regarding locality, causality, and coherence. This study presents a conceptual and structural analysis of quantum field coherence within relativistic space-time. Rather than focusing on specific unification proposals, we examine the compatibility conditions between quantum coherence, relativistic causality, and space-time structure. Particular attention is given to field-based interpretations of quantum states, entanglement propagation limits, and covariance requirements. The analysis synthesizes perspectives from relativistic quantum field theory, conceptual foundations of quantum measurement, and geometric interpretations of space-time. We argue that coherence phenomena can be understood as structurally constrained by relativistic causal order, without requiring violation of space-time locality. The aim of this article is to clarify foundational relationships between quantum coherence and relativistic structure through a conceptual framework that integrates field-theoretic and geometric viewpoints.
This work revisits the long‑standing asymmetry in the treatment of time between quantum theory and general relativity. In quantum theory, time functions as an externally supplied, fine‑grained parameter governing microscopic state updates, whereas in relativity it appears as a coarse‑grained geometric quantity encoded in proper time. This Letter argues that this asymmetry can be understood as a scale‑dependent feature rather than a fundamental inconsistency. By reorganizing the perspective within existing theoretical frameworks—without introducing new physical assumptions—the microscopic time of quantum theory and the macroscopic geometric time of relativity can be interpreted as descriptions operating at different temporal scales. This scale‑dependent viewpoint offers a minimal and conceptually coherent starting point for reconsidering the “problem of time’’ in quantum gravity and provides a basic clue toward bridging quantum theory and relativity. The discussion is intended as a compact conceptual note, and a more detailed mathematical formulation will be presented in a separate work.
This work presents a conceptual and representational framework aimed at clarifying the structural relationships among established physical theories across relativistic, quantum, and cosmological regimes. Rather than proposing new dynamical laws, particles, or experimentally testable predictions, the manuscript focuses on how existing physical descriptions may be consistently interpreted within a unified representational structure. The proposed Dual-Spacetime Projection Framework distinguishes between an underlying descriptive domain and an observed effective spacetime, connected through a scale-dependent projection. This distinction is intended as a formal and interpretative tool, not as an ontological claim about the existence of multiple physical spacetimes. Within this perspective, several foundational features of modern physics—such as Lorentz invariance, finite signal propagation, quantum uncertainty, and large-scale cosmological behavior—are discussed as consequences of representational structure rather than as independent postulates. The manuscript is positioned as a contribution to the foundations of theoretical physics, offering a coherent conceptual lens for organizing and interpreting existing theories. It is intended for readers interested in foundational questions, conceptual unification, and the representational aspects of physical law, and does not rely on experimental data or numerical simulation.
An operational approach to quantum mechanics has been developed in the past decades in our group in Brussels. A similar approach is taken in this work, making use of the extra operational depth offered by this approach, to show that the construction of spacetime is specific to each observer. What is usually referred to as the block universe then emerges by noting that parts of the past and future are also contained in the present, but without the limitations that a four-dimensional block universe usually implies, of a reality in which change would be impossible. In our operational approach, reality remains dynamic, with free choice playing a central role in its conceptualization. We also show that, when operationally analyzed, the theory implies that objects move not only in space, but also and especially in time, and more generally in spacetime, with their rest mass being a measure of their kinetic time energy. We therefore claim that Einstein’s relativity revolution has not been fully realized, since most physicists are not ready to accept these consequences of the theory although the formula’s showing them, when operationally analyzed, are in every relativity textbook. In particular, when relativistic motion is revisited as a genuine four-dimensional motion, it becomes possible to reinterpret the parameter c associated with the coordinate speed of light, which becomes the magnitude of the four-velocity of all material entities. We observe that this four-dimensional motion in Minkowski space can also be better understood if placed in the broader perspective of quantum mechanics, provided that non-locality is interpreted as non-spatiality, thus indicating the existence of an underlying non-spatial reality, the nature of which could be conceptual, consistent with the conceptuality interpretation of quantum mechanics. This hypothesis is reinforced by noting that when observers, or experiencers, as they will be referred to in this article, are described by acknowledging their cognitive nature of entities moving in a semantic space, Minkowski metric emerges in a natural way.