Quantum cosmology is the quantum theory of the entire universe. Although strange at first sight, it is appropriate because (1) our world appears to be fundamentally quantum, (2) the classical description of gravity breaks down at singularities it would give at the beginning of the universe, and (3) our universe has many properties that cannot be explained by a classical description of them. A quantum state of the universe should obey certain constraints, such as the Wheeler-DeWitt equations. One approach to interpreting such a state is {\it Sensible Quantum Mechanics} (SQM), in which nothing is probabilistic, except, in a certain frequency sense, conscious perceptions. Sets of these perceptions can be deterministically realized with measures given by expectation values of positive-operator-valued {\it awareness operators}. These may be defined even when the quantum state itself is not normalizable, though there still seem to be problems of divergences when one has an infinite amount of inflation, producing infinitely large spatial volumes with presumably infinite measures of perceptions. Ratios of the measures for sets of perceptions (if finite) can be interpreted as frequency-type probabilities for many actually existing sets rather than as propensities for potentialities to be actualized, so there is nothing indeterministic in a specific SQM. One can do a Bayesian analysis to test between different specific SQMs. One can also make statistical predictions of what one might perceive within a specific SQM by invoking the {\it Conditional Aesthemic Principle}: among the set of all conscious perceptions, our perceptions are likely to be typical.
Quantum cosmology is the quantum theory of the entire universe. Although strange at first sight, it is appropriate because (1) our world appears to be fundamentally quantum, (2) the classical description of gravity breaks down at singularities it would give at the beginning of the universe, and (3) our universe has many properties that cannot be explained by a classical description of them. A quantum state of the universe should obey certain constraints, such as the Wheeler-DeWitt equations. One approach to interpreting such a state is {\it Sensible Quantum Mechanics} (SQM), in which nothing is probabilistic, except, in a certain frequency sense, conscious perceptions. Sets of these perceptions can be deterministically realized with measures given by expectation values of positive-operator-valued {\it awareness operators}. These may be defined even when the quantum state itself is not normalizable, though there still seem to be problems of divergences when one has an infinite amount of inflation, producing infinitely large spatial volumes with presumably infinite measures of perceptions. Ratios of the measures for sets of perceptions (if finite) can be interpreted as frequency-type probabilities for many actually existing sets rather than as propensities for potentialities to be actualized, so there is nothing indeterministic in a specific SQM. One can do a Bayesian analysis to test between different specific SQMs. One can also make statistical predictions of what one might perceive within a specific SQM by invoking the {\it Conditional Aesthemic Principle}: among the set of all conscious perceptions, our perceptions are likely to be typical.
We reconsider the problem of the interpretation of the Quantum Theory (QT) in the perspective of the entire universe and of Bphr idea that the classical language is the language of our experience and QT acquires a meaning only with a reference to it. We distinguish a classical or macroscopic level, and a quantum or microscopic one that is perceived only through the modifications that it induces in the first. The macroscopic state of the universe is assumed to be specified by a set of variables, a classical energy momentum tensor and some conserved currents, which are supposed to have a well defined value across the entire space-time. To the energy-momentum tensor a classical metric is related by the Einstein equation. The quantum state and dynamics are expressed by the usual QT formalism in terms of a density operator and the ordinary quantum operators in Heisenberg picture. For the macroscopic variables a basic distribution of probability is postulated in terms of a density and the corresponding quantum operators, so in some way their evolution is driven by the underlying QT. Such postulate essentially replaces the usual elfadjoint operators correspondence. For the Universe we adopt a variance of the ΛCDM model with Omega=1, one single inflaton with an Higgs type potential, the initial time at t=minus infinite. The expectation values of all fundamental fields are supposed to vanish for time going to minus infinite. In the framework the scalar fluctuation in the Cosmic Microwave Background are correctly explained giving appropriate calue to the parameters in the potential. As in more conventional models the absence of the tensor fluctuations remains not understood, if even a quantum metric is introduced. This seems to suggest that Gravity is a pure classical phenomenon, what could be consistently accommodated in our formalism by an appropriate even if somewhat ad hoc assumption
Abstract We reconsider the problem of the interpretation of the quantum theory (QT) in the perspective of the entire universe and of the Bohr's idea that the classical language is the language of our experience and QT acquires a meaning only with a reference to it. We distinguish a classical or macroscopic state, and a quantum or microscopic one that is perceived only through the modifications that it induces in the first. The macroscopic state is specified by a set of variables, a classical energy–momentum tensor and conserved currents, which are supposed to have always a well-defined value. The microscopic state and dynamics are expressed by the usual QT formalism. For the macroscopic variables, a basic distribution of probability is postulated in terms of quantum operators and a statistical operator, what replace the usual probability rule of QT. For the universe, a variance of the ΛCDM model with Ω=1 Ω = 1 is assumed, one inflaton, a Goldstone type potential, initial time at t=−∞ t = - ∞ , expectation values of all fundamental fields vanishing for t→−∞ t → - ∞ . The scalar fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background is correctly explained, but the absence of the tensor fluctuations remains not understood. This seems to suggest that gravity is a pure classical phenomenon what perhaps could be accommodated in our framework.
The assumption that a complete description of an early state of the universe does not privilege any position or direction in space leads to a unified account of probability in cosmology, macroscopic physics, and quantum mechanics. Such a description has a statistical character. Deterministic laws link it to statistical descriptions of the cosmic medium at later times, and because these laws do not privilege any position or direction in space, the same must be true of these descriptions. If the universe is infinite, we can identify the probability that the energy density at a particular instant and a particular point in space (relative to a system of spacetime coordinates in which the postulated spatial symmetries are manifest) lies in a given range with the fractional volume occupied by points where the energy density lies in this range; and similarly with all other probabilities that figure in the statistical description. The probabilities that figure in a complete description of the cosmic medium at any given moment thus have an exact and objective physical interpretation. The statistical entropy and the information associated with each cosmological probability distribution are likewise objective properties of the universe, defined in terms of relative frequencies or spatial averages.
In classical physics there is, in accordance with common sense, an objective world ‘out there’. That world evolves in a clear and deterministic way, being governed by precisely formulated mathematical equations. This is as true for the theories of Maxwell and Einstein as it is for the original Newtonian scheme. Physical reality is taken to exist independently of ourselves; and exactly how the classical world ‘is’ is not affected by how we might choose to look at it. Moreover, our bodies and our brains are themselves to be part of that world. They, also, are viewed as evolving according to the same precise and deterministic classical equations. All our actions are to be fixed by these equations - no matter how we might feel that our conscious wills may be influencing how we behave. Such a picture appears to lie at the background of most serious 1 philosophical arguments concerned with the nature of reality, of our conscious perceptions, and of our apparent free will. Some people might have an uncomfortable feeling that there should also be a role for quantum theory - that fundamental but disturbing scheme of things which, in the first quarter of this century, arose out of observations of subtle discrepancies between the actual behaviour of the world and the descriptions of classical physics. To many, the term ‘quantum theory’ evokes merely some vague concept of an ‘uncertainty principle’, which, at the level of particles, atoms or molecules, forbids precision in our descriptions and yields merely probabilistic behaviour. Actually, quantum descriptions are very precise, as we shall see, although radically different from the familiar classical ones. Moreover, we shall find, despite a common view to the contrary, that probabilities do not arise at the minute quantum level of particles, atoms, or molecules - those evolve deterministically - but, seemingly, via some mysterious larger-scale action connected with the emergence of a classical world that we can consciously perceive. We must try to understand this, and how quantum theory forces us to change our view of physical reality.
This theory postulates an inverse way to look at what is large and what is small. When we talk about quantum mechanics we automatically presume that things are smaller at this level. What this theory proposes is that as we drill down into the quantum level we are actually moving towards the infinitely large. As we get down to the atomic and sub-atomic levels things begin to get very strange. Particles pop in and out of existence. They seem to be in more than one place at the same time. They seem to interact by means of entanglement, more famously known as “spooky interaction at a distance”, so named by Albert Einstein. My theory explains why things are so strange “down there”. As we zoom into the sub-atomic levels and beyond we begin to approach the Inverse, a realm where space and time does not exist, and more importantly where the laws of nature or physics do not apply. This Inverse connects everything as we know it; atoms, molecules, matter, stars, galaxies, etc. The Inverse has no physical properties, no energy, nothing we can measure. It is however the originating point of all Universes. It has no beginning or end. It has always been and always will be. Time is of no consequence.
On the line of a recent paper, the problem of interpretation of Quantum Theory (QT) is reconsidered in a cosmological perspective and of Bohr’s idea that the classical language is the language of our experience and QT acquires a meaning only with a reference to it. A classical or macroscopic level is distinguished and a quantum or microscopic one that is perceived only through the modifications that it induces in the first. The macroscopic state is specified by a classical energy-momentum tensor and conserved currents, which are supposed to have always well-defined values. The microscopic dynamics are expressed by the usual QT formalism. Fundamental idea: the usual probability rule of QT, based on an observables self-ajoint operators correspondence, is replaced with a distribution of probability directly for the macroscopic variables, defined in terms of the corresponding quantum operators and a quantum density operator. For the universe, a variance of the standard model with Ω=1 is assumed, one inflaton, a Goldstone type potential, initial time at t =−∞, expectation values of all fundamental fields vanishing for t → −∞. The scalar fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background can be correctly explained giving appropriate values to the potential parameters, but the absence of the tensor fluctuations remains not understood. This seems to suggest that gravity is a pure classical phenomenon, what could be consistently accommodated in our framework but it is inconsistent with the usual formalism.