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.
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.
Causal set theory starts out from a central result in general relativity according to which the causal structure determines, up to a so-called ‘conformal factor’, the geometry of a relativistic spacetime. Space and time, it seems, must be part and parcel of the ontology of any physical theory, of any theory with a credible claim to being a physical theory, that is. After all, physics is the science of the fundamental constitution of the material bodies, their motion in space and time, and indeed of space and time themselves. There are two areas in physics in which space or spacetime may emerge from something qualitatively rather different: wave function monism in quantum mechanics and quantum theories of gravity. The former case concerns a particular interpretative issue in non-relativistic quantum mechanics. The severity and the characteristics of the disappearance of spacetime differ from one approach to quantum gravity to another.
The Quantum theory deals with the microscopic structure of the Universe that describes the finer details of nature at the subatomic domain.To a physicist, quantum mechanics is one of the three great pillars supporting our intuition of evocative, bewildering and fascinating natural World as we continuously struggle with the inescapable strangeness of the subatomic domain as if something strange is always afoot.It is well accepted fact that quantum mechanics is a physical theory that describes the way things behave at subatomic level which is quite dazzling in its precision and explanatory power.A test of quantum electrodynamics, the oldest and best understood of the modern quantum theory that involves measuring the way an electron behaves in the vicinity of a magnetic force. Many of the technological and social changes that have revolutionized our lives have actually risen out of the fundamental theoretical research carried out with only motivation to understand the World in a better way than ever. For example, the invention of transistor actually came with the fundamental theoretical research on the Uncertainty Principle which states that the uncertainty of the position of a particle times the uncertainty of its velocity is always a constant. If we double the certainty of the position of the particle, we have to make half the certainty of its velocity and vice versa. Quantum theory is perhaps the prime example of the infinitely esoteric in the sense that it describes a World in which a particle really can be in several places at once and it moves from one place to another by exploring the entire Universe simultaneously-the theory of simultaneity. The diverse and complex Universe is actually made of a few tiny particles according to the rules of quantum theory which is so simple that can be summarized on the back of an envelope. The more we understand about the elemental nature of the Universe, the simpler it looks. We have already discovered that everything in the diverse and complex Universe is nothing but the different assemblies of atoms, and the wide variety of atoms are constructed using the three building blocks at the sub-atomic domain i.e. subatomic particles: protons, neutrons and electrons. We have also discovered that protons and neutrons ate made up of combination of three entities called quarks. And that is where things stop as far as recent discovery is concerned. But the recent progress in particle physics inspiring the quest for the ultimate unified theory of physics that can describe everything in the Universe in one go. The discovery of Boson particle certainty will revolutionaries the Newton's mass concept and gravity into whole new looks. To an optimistic point of view, we must hope the best out of the progress in physics.
The general view is that all fundamental physical laws should be formulated within the framework given by quantum mechanics (QM). In a sense, QM therefore has the character of a metaphysical theory. Consequently, if it is possible to derive QM from more basic principles, these principles should be of general, philosophical nature. Here, we derive the formalism of QM from well-motivated epistemic principles. A key assumption is that a physical theory that relies on entities or distinctions that are unknowable in principle gives rise to wrong predictions. First, an epistemic formalism is developed, using concepts like knowledge and potential knowledge, identifying a physical state S with the potential knowledge of the physical world. It is demonstrated that QM emerges from this formalism. However, Hilbert spaces, wave functions and probabilities are defined in certain well-defined observational contexts only. This means that the epistemic formalism is broader than QM. In the fundamental layer of description, the physical state S is a subset of a state space S={Z}, such that S always contains many elements Z. These elements correspond to unattainable states of complete knowledge of the world. The evolution of S cannot be determined in terms of the individual evolution of the elements Z, unlike the evolution of an ensemble in classical phase space. The evolution of S is described in terms of sequential time n∈N, which is updated according to n→n+1 each time an event occurs, each time potential knowledge changes. Sequential time n can be separated from relational time t, which describes distances between events in space-time. There is an entire space-time associated with each n, in which t represents the knowledge at sequential time n about the temporal relations between present and past events.
The mind of man is central to the structure and functioning of the physical world. Modern physical theory indicates that the mind stands in a relationship of equals to the physical world. Both are fundamental, neither can be reduced to the other, and both require each other for their full understanding. This thesis is at odds with the view of the universe found in Newtonian mechanics as well as the generally held view among contemporary physicists of modern physical theory. Since the Renaissance, people have come to understand a great deal about the physical world, and they have gained significant control over it. This increased power over the physical world has occurred hand in hand with the assumption that the structure and functioning of the physical world is essentially independent from human cognition. According to this assumption, if a person’s cognitive capacity did not exist, the functioning of the physical world would not be fundamentally altered. This last statement is not in fact correct, and modern physical theory, and even fundamentals underlying Newtonian mechanics, provide evidence to attest to this. Nonetheless, contemporary physicists for the most part do not see that the relationship of human cognition to the physical world is radically altered in their own modern theory, theory that is supported by a great deal of empirical data. Instead, attempting to preserve the thesis that the structure and functioning of the physical world is independent of the mind while on a practical level relying on modern theory that contradicts this thesis, physicists have placed themselves in the position of wondering at times exactly what is the nature of the physical world at the same time they obtain experimental results concerning the physical world that can only be labeled astonishing in their precision and the scope of their implications. Modern physical theory consists of three main components: 1) the special and general theories of relativity; 2) quantum mechanics; and 3) statistical mechanics. There are very successful theories that have been developed on the basis of these three bedrock areas. An example is quantum electrodynamics. But these theories owe their conceptual foundation to the three components mentioned. The basic issues at the core of these three components also are expressed in these later theories. In addition, there are new unresolved issues of a fundamental nature concerning the conceptual integrity of these later theories that do not apply to quantum mechanics, relativity theory, and statistical mechanics. Quantum mechanics and relativity theory are areas I have written about for over twelve years. The nature of statistical mechanics has also been of interest to me during this time. But when I took a serious look in 1993 at Tolman’s (1938) The Principles of Statistical Mechanics, it became clear that the mind is linked to the physical world in statistical mechanics, a relationship I had found earlier in both relativity theory and quantum mechanics. It was after reading Tolman’s justification of the method of statistical mechanics in the original that I decided to write this book. When I found that the three components of modern physical theory all pointed to the same relationship between mind and the physical world, it became clear that the fundamental isolation of the mind from the physical world that has characterized our experience since the development of Newtonian mechanics is unfounded. Based on empirically supported principles of modern physical theory, I determined that the appropriate assumption for one’s experience, that the mind is linked to the physical world, could be stated with confidence. The impact of this change in assumption concerning the relationship of man to the cosmos in modern physical theory will find its way into our everyday experience. It will perhaps have no greater effect than in reducing the sense of isolation of man from the world that has characterized modern existence.
A theory with a simple physical model gives logical and reasonable answers to all the strange phenomena and difficult-to-understand problems in modern physics, from the theory of relativity, quantum mechanics QM, and up to the field of cosmology. It is a theory suitable for explaining phenomena from small particles to large bodies such as stars, galaxies, and the entire universe. In this article, we will define in an innovative manner how space-time is seen and we will give a different graphical representation to the special theory of relativity. We will show how the Lorentz transformation equations and the space-time interval are obtained from it, how light behaves in space-time, and according to it, how to obtain relativistic Doppler formulas. The most important thing in this article is that just as two bodies can be in two different times, according to the theory of relativity, they can also be simultaneously in two different locations. According to it, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and quantum superposition can be explained. We will present for the first time a very common physical phenomenon, but unknown up to this day, which we will call "leap set". According to it, we will logically and deterministically explain the double-slit experiment of electrons and we will show that the result of the experiment is not a wave interference because the electron does not pass through the slits, but it performs a leap set to possible locations on the screen. Also, according to the same model, we will see the conditions and reasons for quantum entanglement and how it is obtained. We will also show the expansion of the universe and Hubble's law according to this theory and model, the Casimir effect as a cosmological phenomenon. We will discuss the possibility of the existence of a mirror world completely identical to our world, located at a distance of 2x13.8Gly in the space-time and we will prove that the material mass energy of the universe is zero.
Many attempts have been made at the unification of General Relativity (GR) and Quantum Theory (QT), but there is a fundamental error made with these attempts, as we will discuss. What is the point of such theories? Well, obviously to describe the physical world we live in. QT describes what happens on the tiny scale, and GR describes what happens to bodies on a large scale. The fundamental error in unifying the two subjects is that QT doesn’t provide the physical happenings for GR to work, or in other words, QT describes why the world is the way it is, but not how, and this does not philosophically suffice in GR. Must we simply give up, in that the subjects are two different entities? I think the answer is that we mustn't. I think that we should put one theory in terms of the basic mechanics of the other, perhaps by simplifying, or perhaps by taking the physical reality to be our guide. Do I believe QT describes the world? Accurately. Do I believe that QT is the physical truth? Of course not… it is simply a mathematical construct to provide a model that allows for us to predict future outcomes. I will begin very simplistic, but the goal for the first part of the paper is to Classically describe the physical mechanics of QT. I will stick with particles in their ground state, and hence no translational motion.