Extended version / Monograph-length manuscript This work proposes a unified conceptual reconstruction of physical phenomena by examining the recurring structural patterns that connect classical and quantum systems across scales. Oscillatory behavior, potential landscapes, and binding principles form a common mathematical template that appears in mechanical oscillators, molecular vibrations, atomic orbitals, and quantized field modes. By reframing quantum phenomena as refinements of classical oscillatory structures rather than conceptual discontinuities, this work highlights the deep continuity that underlies modern physics. The framework also clarifies energy minimization, mass defect, statistical behavior, and vacuum fluctuations as manifestations of shared principles. Implications for pedagogy, theory building, and cross‑disciplinary coherence are discussed.The innovative hypotheses, which depart from classical norms, will be explicitly marked with the heading HYPOTHESIS. As such, they are excluded by default from use as references in current academic or educational frameworks. They may instead be considered “revolutionary attempts to be monitored”, that is, the very “targets” mentioned by Weinberg.Albert Einstein introduced, on the one hand, a special relativity that he wished to be perfectly reversible, and on the other hand, general relativity which, when applied to cosmology, imposed on our Universe a spherical and static state—thus of constant radius—resisting gravitational collapse through the repulsion of the cosmological constant.Here, the associated relativities will instead give priority to irreversible systems evolving in accordance with the second law of thermodynamics, within their local space-time domain of one-way time flow.
Extended version / Monograph-length manuscript This work proposes a unified conceptual reconstruction of physical phenomena by examining the recurring structural patterns that connect classical and quantum systems across scales. Oscillatory behavior, potential landscapes, and binding principles form a common mathematical template that appears in mechanical oscillators, molecular vibrations, atomic orbitals, and quantized field modes. By reframing quantum phenomena as refinements of classical oscillatory structures rather than conceptual discontinuities, this work highlights the deep continuity that underlies modern physics. The framework also clarifies energy minimization, mass defect, statistical behavior, and vacuum fluctuations as manifestations of shared principles. Implications for pedagogy, theory building, and cross‑disciplinary coherence are discussed.The innovative hypotheses, which depart from classical norms, will be explicitly marked with the heading HYPOTHESIS. As such, they are excluded by default from use as references in current academic or educational frameworks. They may instead be considered “revolutionary attempts to be monitored”, that is, the very “targets” mentioned by Weinberg.Albert Einstein introduced, on the one hand, a special relativity that he wished to be perfectly reversible, and on the other hand, general relativity which, when applied to cosmology, imposed on our Universe a spherical and static state—thus of constant radius—resisting gravitational collapse through the repulsion of the cosmological constant.Here, the associated relativities will instead give priority to irreversible systems evolving in accordance with the second law of thermodynamics, within their local space-time domain of one-way time flow.
Extended version / Monograph-length manuscript This work proposes a unified conceptual reconstruction of physical phenomena by examining the recurring structural patterns that connect classical and quantum systems across scales. Oscillatory behavior, potential landscapes, and binding principles form a common mathematical template that appears in mechanical oscillators, molecular vibrations, atomic orbitals, and quantized field modes. By reframing quantum phenomena as refinements of classical oscillatory structures rather than conceptual discontinuities, this work highlights the deep continuity that underlies modern physics. The framework also clarifies energy minimization, mass defect, statistical behavior, and vacuum fluctuations as manifestations of shared principles. Implications for pedagogy, theory building, and cross‑disciplinary coherence are discussed. The innovative hypotheses, which depart from classical norms, will be explicitly marked with the heading HYPOTHESIS. As such, they are excluded by default from use as references in current academic or educational frameworks. They may instead be considered “revolutionary attempts to be monitored”, that is, the very “targets” mentioned by Weinberg. Albert Einstein introduced, on the one hand, a special relativity that he wished to be perfectly reversible, and on the other hand, general relativity which, when applied to cosmology, imposed on our Universe a spherical and static state—thus of constant radius—resisting gravitational collapse through the repulsion of the cosmological constant. Here, the associated relativities will instead give priority to irreversible systems evolving in accordance with the second law of thermodynamics, within their local space-time domain of one-way time flow. quantum physics, classical physics, grand unification, field theory, atomic stability, Albert Briffoz, physique quantique, unification, théorie des champs
This article proposes a unified conceptual reconstruction of physical phenomena by examining the recurring structural patterns that connect classical and quantum systems across scales. Oscillatory behavior, potential landscapes, and binding principles form a common mathematical template that appears in mechanical oscillators, molecular vibrations, atomic orbitals, and quantized field modes. By reframing quantum phenomena as refinements of classical oscillatory structures rather than conceptual discontinuities, this work highlights the deep continuity that underlies modern physics. The framework also clarifies energy minimization, mass defect, statistical behavior, and vacuum fluctuations as manifestations of shared principles. Implications for pedagogy, theory building, and cross‑disciplinary coherence are discussed.
Abstract Fundamental discrepancies exist among the foundational postulates of classical mechanics, relativity and quantum mechanics, leaving long-standing open physical puzzles including the origin of the arrow of time, quantum measurement collapse and the nature of spacetime. This paper proposes a self-consistent unified physical paradigm: the physical essence of a reference frame is the selective filtering of the full degrees of freedom of a system. All classical, relativistic and quantum physical theories constitute effective reduced descriptions of degrees of freedom under specific rules imposed by reference frames. Core phenomena such as temporal irreversibility, wave-function collapse, the constancy of the speed of light and the quantum-classical transition are not fundamental ontological properties of the universe, but emergent effects arising from filtering mappings introduced by finite-bandwidth observers. This work establishes an axiomatic framework for reference frames and degree-of-freedom filtering, defining projection filtering mappings, the principle of vanishing relative degrees of freedom, and the dimensionless filtering ratio. Within this framework, we reconstruct classical mechanics, special and general relativity, quantum decoherence and quantum measurement theory. Three categories of irreversible mechanisms — statistical coarse-graining, environmental partial-trace decoherence and time-domain sampling truncation — are integrated into a single mathematical structure. A universal dimensionless filtering ratio is defined. We clarify that the continuity of the control parameter does not imply that observables must evolve smoothly. Conceptually, the system can exhibit three regimes: quantum superposition, intermediate transition and classical state. Experiments on quantum bits at the Weizmann Institute provide preliminary observational hints, yet further verification is required; no specific form of the response curve is assumed in this paper. Three falsifiable quantitative predictions are put forward, involving attosecond spectroscopy, decoherence of superconducting qubits and cold-atom interferometry. We compare the present paradigm with relational quantum mechanics, QBism and consistent histories, discuss the ontological implications of time, observers and irreversibility, and outline extensions towards quantum gravity and cognitive science.
Abstract Quantum mechanics and relativity are extraordinarily successful mathematical theories, yet their conventional physical interpretations rely on substantially different conceptual frameworks. The Theory of Space (TS) proposes a fourth dimension defined by the Planck-related interval, with interpreted as a longitudinal dimension associated with energy (cτ), rather than as the conventional Minkowski spacetime interval. This fourth dimension does not coexist continuously with the observable three spatial dimensions as a conventional four-dimensional manifold. Instead, TS proposes an oscillatory existence between observable 3D presence and a non-observable fourth-dimensional phase. Through this oscillation, the quantum system undergoes repeated dimensional projection into observable 3D, with individual eigenstates manifested probabilistically while the underlying quantum state continues to evolve. Within this framework, phenomena including measurement, the Born rule, the arrow of time, entropy, entanglement, tunneling, and Bell-type correlations acquire a common physical interpretation. Heisenberg uncertainty and non-commutativity are interpreted as consequences of physical parameters associated with different phases of the dimensional oscillation and therefore not simultaneously manifested within the same 3D instance. TS further distinguishes between the quantum system’s spatial component and its compact physical entity. Their coexistence within the complete system provides a proposed physical basis for quantum interference and phase-dependent phenomena, including the double-slit experiment and the path-integral description of quantum evolution. As an extension of the model, TS proposes that the periodic displacement and replacement of quantum space generate a pulsed inward spatial flow. This mechanism provides a possible basis for a quantized gravitational interaction and suggests that gravitational energy may be represented by a positive contribution. Related developments, including spiral spatial flows, follow naturally from the same dimensional-oscillation mechanism. The Theory of Space therefore seeks to provide a common conceptual framework for quantum, relativistic, and gravitational phenomena without replacing the established mathematical equations that successfully reproduce experimental observations. The present work develops this framework and invites critical examination of its assumptions, physical implications, and potential experimental consequences. Keywords: relativity; Lorentz transformation; quantum superposition; quantum superposition; collapse; entanglement; quantum gravity
A conceptual framework addressing three foundational questions: why something exists rather than nothing, why the universe appears stable and law-governed, and why quantum mechanics and general relativity appear to describe different realities. The framework proposes that ultimate reality has structure but is not bound by deterministic causal relations — events need not follow from prior states — and that our universe is a region of local coherence within this field, where such causal relations hold locally. The proposal is placed in conceptual dialogue with KAM theory (Kolmogorov–Arnold–Moser, 1954), invoked not as a formal model but as an existence proof that the concept of "islands of order within disorder" is mathematically coherent. The central implication is that the tension between quantum mechanics and general relativity may be a boundary phenomenon rather than a unification problem. Constructed without prior academic knowledge of the referenced work; correspondences identified after the fact. Version note: This revision (17 April 2026) substantially restructures the argument of the original draft (14 April 2026). Key changes: (1) the characterization of ultimate reality is reformulated from "containing both logic and chaos" to "not bound by deterministic causal relation," as logic and illogic require each other as contrast and cannot serve as distinct modes; (2) the KAM connection is clarified as conceptual reference rather than formal mapping; (3) the "personal implication" section on pattern identity and recurrence has been removed as structurally separate from the core framework; (4) open problems — quantum phenomena observed throughout macroscopic regimes, the absence of a derivation connecting to the decoherence program, and the distinction between shared location and shared theory with Mnaymneh (arXiv:2508.00044) — are now explicitly flagged rather than elided.