Wave mechanics and general relativity: a rapprochement

Vitaly Kuyukov

General relativity and universal wave function

Georges Lochak, Regis Dutheil

Paul S. Wesson

Using exact solutions, we show that it is in principle possible to regard waves and particles as representations of the same underlying geometry, thereby resolving the problem of wave-particle duality.

I.S. Urbanaeva

The article highlights those discoveries of quantum physics, the philosophical understanding of which leads researchers to compare its ontology with Buddhist ontology. These are phenomena that reveal the subjectivism of physics. Thus, the discovery of the fundamental role of the observer for quantum mechanical processes and the collapse of the wave function became a «bridge» for the rapprochement of quantum mechanics and Buddhist philosophy, which asserts the relative nature of reality. The phenomenon of quantum non-locality or the plurality of parallel worlds became another basis for seeing the similarity of quantum physics and Buddhism. The idea of universal interdependence, characteristic of relational interpretations of quantum physics, also contributes to strengthening the idea of its similarity with Buddhist ontology. However, as the analysis of two representative comparative approaches shows – one developed by W. Mansfield from the side of physics, and the other developed by A. A. Terentyev from the side of Buddhism – the general tendency to compare the ontology of quantum physics and Buddhism is based on the incorrect reduction of Buddhist ontology to the doctrine of dependent origination and the wrongful identification of emptiness with dependent origination. Although the perception of Buddhist ontology as «Indra’s net» serves for comparativists from the side of physics, as well as for a wide circle of intellectuals, as the first step towards understanding the closeness of Buddhist philosophy to modern science, nevertheless, such popular interpretations are not entirely correct.

Michael Tsamparlis

C. T. K. Chari

J. P. McKINNEY, his interesting discussion Philosophy East and West for October, 1953, has suggested that it is quantum physics, or wave mechanics, based on Planck's quantum of energy and Heisenberg's Principle of Indeterminacy or Uncertainty, that the real revolution of thought is now seen as having taken place. Here thought has reached back to that in-itself-undifferentiated 'substratum' which is seen as underlying the common world of determinate things time and space.' McKinney has advanced the opinion that in effect, Western thought has been brought round-actually has brought itself round by the inner logical necessity of its own development-to a standpoint which has been the traditional assumption of Eastern thought.2 I think McKinney has overstated his case. If, as he has urged, there are reasons for distrusting the popular idealistic interpretations of relativity, there seem to be no less valid reasons for doubting the exaggerated, quasimystical constructions put on quantum mechanics. At least two important facts must be taken into account: (1) Western scientists do not agree as to what, if any, the metaphysical implications of quantum mechanics are; (2) Western scientists do not agree, even from a scientific point of view, with respect to the proper interpretation of certain crucial aspects of quantum mechanics.