A Philosophical reconciliation between Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity

Vasil Dinev Penchev

Tirupattur Srinivasan Natarajan

Anubhav Srivastava

ORIGIN NOTE: The theoretical framework presented in this paper was first established and publicly released by the author, Anubhav Srivastava, in the treatise 'Nothing/Everything: The Mindbending Philosophical Theory of Everything' in May, 2025. This document serves as a condensed research distillation for formal archival and DOI indexing. This paper provides a foundational philosophical and logical resolution to the century-long conflict between the deterministic "Block Universe" of General Relativity and the probabilistic branching of the Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) of quantum mechanics. This paper first proposes a formal mechanism for the transition from a state of absolute ontological neutrality to the structured, deterministic laws of physics observed within localized universes. Grounded in the "Nothing with No Laws" axiom, first discussed in the book Nothing/Everything: The Mind-Bending Philosophical Theory of Everything, which posits that an absolute absence of governing constraints necessitates the timeless actualization of all possible configurations of existence, this paper describes the philosophical mechanism behind how such an actualization could take place. We propose it as the Timeless Cosmic Branching Mechanism (TCBM). Utilizing a multidimensional branching model situated beyond linear time, and using "cosmic dice-roll" analogies, the paper demonstrates how reality bifurcates into "Familiar" and "Alien" superstructures. It introduces the model of Progressive Determinism, arguing that initial probabilistic potential crystallizes into fixed law-sets through a sequence of static, simultaneous snapshots. A critical distinction is drawn between this framework and Charles Sanders Peirce’s Tychism. While Peirce suggested that physical laws evolve as "habits" over time within a singular universe, the author contends that this branching is a Timeless Structural Property of the Zeromniverse, the term itself implying a Cosmic Library like state of Infinite Universes unfolding themselves via infinite probabilities, timelessly. In this model, all stages of "evolution" exist simultaneously as static snapshots, resolving the tension between quantum probabilistic beginnings and macroscopic superdeterminism. Later, the work posits that the apparent temporal "splitting" of universes is a Chrono-centric illusion. Drawing on the Wheeler-DeWitt equation (HΨ=0), the paper argues that all quantum interactions and their resulting branches exist simultaneously as static, timeless coordinates within the Zeromniverse. This model reconciles the macro-scale causality of Relativity with quantum probability by introducing Superdeterministic Bubbles—individual universal reels that are internally deterministic despite their probabilistic origin. By framing physical laws as emergent "genetics" within a timeless Darwinian speciation process, the TCBM offers a definitive conceptual bridge between the two pillars of modern physics, effectively resolving the "First Cause" paradox and the problem of linear time.

Amos Maley

This paper presents an interpretive boundary result concerning the relationship between general relativity and quantum mechanics under a closed admissibility framework. It argues that both theories are best understood not as competing ontologies or incomplete fragments of a deeper unification, but as projection regimes—distinct bookkeeping skins licensed over a shared admissible interior. The analysis is eliminative rather than constructive. It does not propose a unifying theory, new dynamics, or a reconciliation mechanism. Instead, it demonstrates that apparent incompatibilities between GR and QM arise from scope-relative representational commitments, not from ontic conflict. When admissibility, standing conservation, and reference stability are treated as fixed constraints, the demand for further unification collapses: each theory is shown to be internally coherent and mutually non-conflicting within its licensed expressive envelope. No new primitives are introduced. No procedural or operational framework is specified. The result functions as a boundary clarification, blocking a class of illicit inferences that treat representational artifacts as ontological commitments. In doing so, it reframes long-standing unification problems as category errors induced by projection overreach rather than as open foundational gaps. This work is intended as a structural constraint on interpretation, not as a program for further development. It closes, rather than advances, a line of inquiry by showing why certain questions are inadmissible once the boundary conditions of representation are made explicit.

Hitoshi Kitada, Lancelot R. Fletcher

The notions of time in the theories of Newton and Einstein are reviewed so that certain of their assumptions are clarified. These assumptions will be seen as the causes of the incompatibility between the two different ways of understanding time, and seen to be philosophical hypotheses, rather than purely scientific ones. The conflict between quantum mechanics and (general) relativity is shown to be a consequence of retaining the Newtonian conception of time in the context of quantum mechanics. As a remedy for this conflict, an alternative definition of time -- earlier presented in Kitada 1994a and 1994b -- is reviewed with less mathematics and more emphasis on its philosophical aspects. Based on this revised understanding of time it is shown that quantum mechanics and general relativity are reconciled while preserving the current mathematical formulations of both theories.