A unifying theory is put forward that entropy is equal to action. The crowning derivation is based on information theoretic methods and uses our hypothesis that "particles move via the discrete Bernoulli Process." While this hypothesis matches special relativity for the mean value of a particle's location, the variance appears to open the possibility of new physics. Specifically, the variance is dependent on the square of the particle's velocity and since no reference frame is given, we ask if this velocity is absolute and measurable. To answer this question, we conducted an experiment to measure the jitter on a clock and found a combined 26 sigma three-spike signal in the Fourier Transform of the jitter's magnitude. These spikes are predicted by the hypothesis since the laboratory's velocity fluctuates due to the Earth revolving and rotating as the solar system moves through the Universe. When analyzing the phase and magnitude, the data suggests the velocity of the laboratory is a validation of the Planck collaboration which measured the same velocity of Earth in the Cosmic Microwave Background reference frame. Lastly, a second experiment is underway to ratify these findings.
A unifying theory is put forward that entropy is equal to action. The crowning derivation is based on information theoretic methods and uses our hypothesis that "particles move via the discrete Bernoulli Process." While this hypothesis matches special relativity for the mean value of a particle's location, the variance appears to open the possibility of new physics. Specifically, the variance is dependent on the square of the particle's velocity and since no reference frame is given, we ask if this velocity is absolute and measurable. To answer this question, we conducted an experiment to measure the jitter on a clock and found a combined 26 sigma three-spike signal in the Fourier Transform of the jitter's magnitude. These spikes are predicted by the hypothesis since the laboratory's velocity fluctuates due to the Earth revolving and rotating as the solar system moves through the Universe. When analyzing the phase and magnitude, the data suggests the velocity of the laboratory is a validation of the Planck collaboration which measured the same velocity of Earth in the Cosmic Microwave Background reference frame. Lastly, a second experiment is underway to ratify these findings.
For many years, major theoretical efforts have been underway to unify gravity and the other forces. Today I suggest a different direction for unification; that of the unification of action and entropy. Exploring a few different derivations of this governing thought, we unveil new physics in that the variance of a particle is dependent on its absolute velocity. While this theory has multiple simple arguments that point in the same direction, it might seem speculative. Thus, a testable hypothesis is put forward that particles move via the discrete Bernoulli process which is a core assumption of these derivations. Still anticipating resistance to exploring this line of thinking, an experiment to measure the variance of jitter was undertaken. The experiment has collected 2 years of continuous jitter on 2 clocks and calculated the Fourier Transform of its magnitude. Three spikes in the data, which combine to 19+ sigma away from current theory, are not only predicted by our hypothesis, but the best fit parameters of the hypothesis suggest the Earth is moving with the same velocity as the Planck collaboration measured Earth is moving in the Cosmic Microwave Reference Frame. Lastly this line of thinking, where one explores the variance instead of the mean value of a particle's location, is worthwhile as it gives insight into the original desire to unify gravity with quantum mechanics.
The Cosmic Mirror Hypothesis is a deterministic, non-local hidden variable theory of quantum entanglement. Every particle is postulated to have a mirror twin; each pair is described by a single hidden variable λ, uniformly distributed on the unit sphere in a preferred rest frame Σ₀ identified with the cosmic microwave background. Measurement outcomes are deterministic functions of λ, reproducing the standard singlet correlation E₀(a,b) = −a·b exactly in Σ₀. When the experiment is performed in a moving laboratory frame, the classical aberration of spatial directions under a Lorentz boost produces a first-order correction to the correlation, yielding a predicted amplitude of V/c ≈ 1.33×10⁻³ for perpendicular measurement settings — a value quantum mechanics predicts to be exactly zero. The paper presents the full axiomatic basis, two independent derivations of the rest-frame correlation, the complete moving-frame derivation, a detailed experimental proposal, statistical and systematic error analysis, and a Monte Carlo simulation confirming detectability at signal-to-noise ratio ≈ 74 with current technology. The prediction is falsifiable by a dedicated Bell test that tracks apparatus orientation relative to the CMB rest frame. Version 2 - Changes from Version 1 Replaced the moving-frame derivation in Part II entirely. The original Wigner rotation formalism was removed and replaced with a derivation based on classical relativistic aberration of spatial directions, which is the appropriate transformation law for a classical hidden variable. This corrects a circular argument in the original derivation and reduces the predicted amplitude from 2V/c to V/c ≈ 1.33×10⁻³. Added explicit proof that the theory is non-signalling in all frames, including moving laboratory frames (Part II, Section 9.1). Added Jackson (1999) §11.3 as the citation for the aberration formula. Added a quantitative proof that orientation averaging in prior Bell tests erases the predicted signal exactly, not merely approximately (Part III, Objection 6). Added explicit comparison with Bohmian mechanics, clarifying that the Cosmic Mirror Hypothesis makes the opposite architectural choice: the preferred frame appears directly in the correlations rather than being hidden inside the dynamics (Part II, Section 11). Added discussion of hybrid treatments and their effect on the prediction (Part II, Section 11). Added Czachor (1997) and Terashima and Ueda (2003) to the bibliography and situated the Cosmic Mirror Hypothesis within the prior literature on relativistic Bell correlations. Corrected the regularisation argument in the Fourier derivation (Part I, Section 3.2). Corrected minor typographical errors throughout.V3 Abstract The Cosmic Mirror Hypothesis is a deterministic, non-local hidden variable theory of quantum entanglement. Every particle is postulated to have a mirror twin; each pair is described by a single hidden variable λ, uniformly distributed on the unit sphere in a preferred rest frame Σ₀ identified with the cosmic microwave background. Measurement outcomes are deterministic functions of λ, reproducing the standard singlet correlation E₀(a,b) = −a·b exactly in Σ₀. When the experiment is performed in a laboratory frame moving with velocity V relative to Σ₀, the classical aberration of spatial directions produces a first-order correction to the correlation. In the idealised sharp-response limit this yields a predicted amplitude of V/c ≈ 1.33×10⁻³ for perpendicular measurement settings—a value quantum mechanics predicts to be exactly zero. However, any physical measurement possesses finite angular resolution, which convolves the sharp outcome function with a narrow smearing kernel and suppresses the linear term by a factor η(θ_c). For plausible detector parameters consistent with existing experimental visibilities, η(θ_c) ≲ 10⁻², reducing the effective laboratory-frame modulation to the range 10⁻⁵–10⁻⁴. The paper presents the full axiomatic basis, two independent derivations of the rest-frame correlation, the complete moving-frame derivation including the suppression mechanism, a detailed experimental proposal employing a continuously rotating platform with star-camera tracking of the CMB rest frame, statistical and systematic error analysis, and a Monte Carlo simulation demonstrating that a coherent fit over 30 days of data can recover the suppressed signal at signal-to-noise ratio ≈ 90–120. The prediction is falsifiable by a dedicated Bell test that actively tracks apparatus orientation relative to the CMB rest frame. A null result at the 10⁻⁷ level would definitively rule out the hypothesis; a positive detection would constitute direct evidence for a deterministic hidden structure underlying quantum entanglement.
A new Quantum Theory is herein obtained by imposing a classical stochastic proce.ss on the kinematics of Relativity, A fundamental consequence is that the Quantum mechanism is subject t•oi i I ~~e examine some implications attending classical interpretG.tion.the view that.a mathematical model, representing a perfectly defined material particle in an exa.ctly duplicable deterministic potential field, cannot be an adequate approximation to a realistic~ physical process but must lead to untenable predict ions at atomic dimensions.\'le first assume a nonvanishing fluctuating background interaction .due to "distant stars" that results in rand.om, I scattering along the 'dorld line of the particle.He then 1ntroduce. ! an ensemble of particles• and explore most probable motions in the associated 3-apace projection as given by a pair of coupled nonlinear equations, The most probable motions are in turn found to satisfy the Klein-Gordon equation, viii '
We consider the following two questions. Suppose that a quantum system suffers a change of the boundary condition or the potential at a given space location. Then (1) when will the wavefunction shows a response to this change at another location? And (2) how does the wavefunction changes?The answer to question (1) could reveal how a quantum system gets information on the boundary condition or the potential. Here we show that if the response takes place immediately, then it can allow superluminal signal transfer. Else if the response propagates in space with a finite velocity, then it could give a simple explanation why our world shows classicality on the macroscopic scale. Furthermore, determining the exact value of this velocity can either clarify the doubts on static experiments for testing Bell’s inequality, or support the pilot‐wave interpretation of quantum mechanics. We propose a feasible experimental scheme for measuring this velocity, which can be implemented with state‐of‐art technology, e.g., single‐electron biprism interferometry.Question (2) is studied with a square‐well potential model, and we find a paradox between the impossibility of superluminal signal transfer and the normalization condition of wavefunctions. To solve the paradox, we predict that when a change of the potential occurs at a given space location, the system will show no response to this change at all, until after a certain time interval. Otherwise either special relativity or quantum mechanics will be violated. As a consequence, no physical process can actually happen within Planck time. Therefore it gives a simple proof that time is discrete, with Planck time being the smallest unit. Combining with the answer to question (1), systems with a larger size and a slower velocity could have a larger unit of time, making it possible to test the discreteness of time experimentally. Our result also sets a limit on the speed of computers, and gives instruction to the search of quantum gravity theories.
There are several links between information theory — between »information as such« whatever that might mean — and the foundations of nature, i e, basic physics. Well, since physics a science still evolving (despite propositions that »the end of science« now in sight), some of the links between information and physics are hypothetical. One linkage fairly obvious — thermodynamics depends upon entropy or some measure of order or disorder, and that clearly has something to do with information. The other possible relationship might be between the uncertainty that a key characteristic of quantum mechanics. We can never know everything on the quantum scale; the Heisenberg uncertainty principle tells that the more information we gain in one direction the less we know in another. If we, on that scale, obtain certainty as to one factor, then another will stay entirely undecided — try to affix a position to a quantum particle, and the momentum will be out of bounds entirely. (This the established dogma currently, though there are some deviating ideas.1) Then the question arises: who does the actual measuring, with what — what particles, at what level, are involved in this act of, as it pronounced, forcing the wave function to collapse? This wave function is the indeterminate particle: the various statistics describing the probabilities that the particle (which simultaneously takes on aspects of a wave) may be in one state or another. We will now attempt to discuss these different — or are they really different? — interdependencies, starting with black holes.