Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:physics/9801021

Do We See the ``Dark Clouds'' Again? --- On Some Puzzles in Contemporary Physics

Guang-jiong Ni

Published Jan 17, 1998• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Some conceptual problems in physics are discussed. Do we need a change in the concept of matter structure? Why the ``$i=\sqrt{-1}$'' is introduced to quantum mechanics (QM) essentially? What is the relation between QM and special relativity (SR)? Could we modify the stationary Schr$\ddot{\rm o}$dinger equation in conformity with SR? How can a particle acquire a mass? We propose some tentative answer. Their philosophical implications are emphasized.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.physics/9801021

Related papers

To Enjoy the Morning Flower in the Evening -- Where is the Subtlety of Quantum Mechanics?

Guang-jiong Ni

Why does the $i=\sqrt{-1}$ appear essentially in the quantum mechanics? Why are there operators and noncommutativity (the uncertainty relation) in the quantum mechanics? Why are these two aspects closely related and indivisible? In probing these problems, a new point of view is proposed tentatively.

arXiv:quant-ph/9804013•Apr 5, 1998•0 citations

Discussion on the Particle-Wave Duality and the Wave Velocity Problem

Huang Zhi-xu

The velocity is a macroscopic concept. The question what is the meaning of velocity in Quantum Mechanics( QM) ,this problem itself is inno answersituation. In the semi-classical theory,for the reconstruction of the velocity definition,we have v→= ▽S / m[m is the particle's mass and ψ = Aexp( j S /h) ]. This method builds the relation of velocity and wave function,but it is not the necessary and useful concept of wave's speed. The velocity of light in vacuum is a common basic constant of physics,however QM also need this parameter obviously,i. e. the new wave mechanics is on need of this physical quantity.The process and result of people's practice show that,scientist has intended to bring forth in the measurement of c with very high accuracy does stand out,if he used the scalar equation c = fλ. Modern physics maintain that the wave velocities( phase velocityvp、group velocity vg) are scalars,not vectors.The wave has its special scientific features; the regular pattern is different from the Classical Mechanics( CM). It needs supports of the QM,but it is not identical with the serious QM. Now,it has not only a theory that can explain the wave problems perfectly,so it is support by the classical physics and quantum physics.The quantization process of EM fields explains the particle-wave duality mathematically. Post quantization,from the EM fields we obtained the photons. But scientist still is puzzled by a difficult question:what is photon. As the common knowledge,the matter waves of photon still a paradox in physics. In addition,the electronic probability waves corresponding the Schrdinger equation,but people says the photonic probability waves have not that wave equation. In other words,the physical meanings of matter wave's phase velocity are not clear,and why the phase velocity of de Broglie waves is faster-than-light,many explanations will be needed.Many instances similar to these examples make the particle-wave duality still the magic ghost in modern physics. Finally,the study on negative wave velocity( NWV) in recent years has a great deal of experience on wave sciences,and bring the new chance on theoretical thinking.

现代传播：中国传媒大学学报•Jan 1, 2014•0 citations

Some aspectos of quantum physics

Newton C. A. da Costa

I discuss some questions of quantum physics, for instance the validity and limitations of the basic language of set theory to deal with problems related to elementary particles. I also present a sketch of a formalization of a “metaphysics of structures”, which might be useful for a kind of “ontic structural realism”, and briefly review the concept of quasi-truth, which underlies my way of understanding scientific theories and the scientific activity.

•Jan 1, 2007•0 citations

Establishing the Schrödinger Equation for Macroscopic Objects and Changing Human Scientific Concepts

Runsheng Tu

We should try to establish the Schr ö dinger equation for gravitational potential energy and use it to describe macroscopic objects. Replacing the electromagnetic potential energy in the Hamiltonian operator with gravitational potential energy can achieve the goal. The successful application of the Schr ö dinger equation for gravitational potential energy can change many existing concepts in quantum mechanics and shake the conceptual system of quantum mechanics. This can promote the development of quantum mechanics and other fields of physics.

Advances in Theoretical & Computational Physics•Dec 31, 2024•1 citation

On the Present State of the Philosophy of Quantum Mathematics

Howard Stein

It was with some trepidation that I agreed to speak today, because of a strong doubt that I could say anything substantial not already to be found in the literature of the subject. I cannot say that this trepidation has been subsequently relieved: all I can claim to offer in this paper is a review of certain basic characteristics or themes in the quantum-mechanical situation (which by now should, I think, be thoroughly understood by everyone engaged with the matter), supplemented by some rather general reflections on our philosophical predicament. In aid of these more general reflections, I shall indulge a proclivity for calling on historical matters—some fairly recent, some older, some ancient—which I hope may serve to place current issues in a useful perspective; and I ask your forgiveness for allowing myself to quote certain previous, but hitherto unpublished, remarks of my own.

PSA Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association•Jan 1, 1982•3 citations

Why Does Quantum Mechanics not Scale Up

Dirk John Pons, Arion Pons, Ariel M. Pons +1 more

Quantum mechanics (QM) has the problem of lacking a coherent conceptual foundation, even if its quantitative algorithms are functionally adequate. This paper appraises the conceptual logic beneath quantum mechanics, using as the point of reference a novel alternative conceptual framework called the cordus conjecture. If the cordus conjecture is correct then the comparison suggests that quantum mechanics is conceptually fallacious in several areas: (1) Particles need not be zero-dimensional points after all. (2) Bell�s theorem is refuted as being not universally applicable, and the principle of locality also fails. (3) The wavefunction is a mathematical approximation of a deeper reality, and superposition is not a physical state. (4) Superposition confounds positional and causal (temporal) variability, and this causes the weirdness of the QM interpretations. (5) Cordus identifies the factors that cause decoherence and (6) explains why quantum mechanics does not scale up to macroscopic objects. (7) It is fallacious to consider fields and particles as independent phenomena. Instead they are closely coupled in the cordus, and this explains the measurement context. Several core principles of QM are thereby refuted. The paradox of Schr�dinger�s Cat is explained as an artefact of these flawed premises. The paper also explains why the mathematical machinery of quantum mechanics is a reasonable approximation to reality, even if the concepts are not. The mathematics works, at least within a certain scale-range where: (a) things look like particles and the proposed cordus structure is not evident (i.e. not too small) and (b) where body-coherence is attainable (i.e. not too large). Outside of that range quantum mechanics seems neither conceptually nor mathematically relevant. The same analysis predicts QM is unlikely to scale down to the next deeper level of physics. The implications are that QM is profoundly deficient in its conceptual foundations, and is only an approximation of a deeper and more logically consistent mechanics.

•Jul 1, 2011•3 citations
Some conceptual problems in physics are discussed. Do we need a change in the concept of matter structure? Why the ``i=−1i=\sqrt{-1}i=−1​'' is introduced to quantum mechanics (QM) essentially? What is the relation between QM and special relativity (SR)? Could we modify the stationary Schro¨\ddot{\rm o}o¨dinger equation in conformity with SR? How can a particle acquire a mass? We propose some tentative answer. Their philosophical implications are emphasized.
Why does the i=−1i=\sqrt{-1}i=−1​ appear essentially in the quantum mechanics? Why are there operators and noncommutativity (the uncertainty relation) in the quantum mechanics? Why are these two aspects closely related and indivisible? In probing these problems, a new point of view is proposed tentatively.
The velocity is a macroscopic concept. The question what is the meaning of velocity in Quantum Mechanics( QM) ,this problem itself is inno answersituation. In the semi-classical theory,for the reconstruction of the velocity definition,we have v→= ▽S / m[m is the particle's mass and ψ = Aexp( j S /h) ]. This method builds the relation of velocity and wave function,but it is not the necessary and useful concept of wave's speed. The velocity of light in vacuum is a common basic constant of physics,however QM also need this parameter obviously,i. e. the new wave mechanics is on need of this physical quantity.The process and result of people's practice show that,scientist has intended to bring forth in the measurement of c with very high accuracy does stand out,if he used the scalar equation c = fλ. Modern physics maintain that the wave velocities( phase velocityvp、group velocity vg) are scalars,not vectors.The wave has its special scientific features; the regular pattern is different from the Classical Mechanics( CM). It needs supports of the QM,but it is not identical with the serious QM. Now,it has not only a theory that can explain the wave problems perfectly,so it is support by the classical physics and quantum physics.The quantization process of EM fields explains the particle-wave duality mathematically. Post quantization,from the EM fields we obtained the photons. But scientist still is puzzled by a difficult question:what is photon. As the common knowledge,the matter waves of photon still a paradox in physics. In addition,the electronic probability waves corresponding the Schrdinger equation,but people says the photonic probability waves have not that wave equation. In other words,the physical meanings of matter wave's phase velocity are not clear,and why the phase velocity of de Broglie waves is faster-than-light,many explanations will be needed.Many instances similar to these examples make the particle-wave duality still the magic ghost in modern physics. Finally,the study on negative wave velocity( NWV) in recent years has a great deal of experience on wave sciences,and bring the new chance on theoretical thinking.
We should try to establish the Schr ö dinger equation for gravitational potential energy and use it to describe macroscopic objects. Replacing the electromagnetic potential energy in the Hamiltonian operator with gravitational potential energy can achieve the goal. The successful application of the Schr ö dinger equation for gravitational potential energy can change many existing concepts in quantum mechanics and shake the conceptual system of quantum mechanics. This can promote the development of quantum mechanics and other fields of physics.
It was with some trepidation that I agreed to speak today, because of a strong doubt that I could say anything substantial not already to be found in the literature of the subject. I cannot say that this trepidation has been subsequently relieved: all I can claim to offer in this paper is a review of certain basic characteristics or themes in the quantum-mechanical situation (which by now should, I think, be thoroughly understood by everyone engaged with the matter), supplemented by some rather general reflections on our philosophical predicament. In aid of these more general reflections, I shall indulge a proclivity for calling on historical matters—some fairly recent, some older, some ancient—which I hope may serve to place current issues in a useful perspective; and I ask your forgiveness for allowing myself to quote certain previous, but hitherto unpublished, remarks of my own.
Quantum mechanics (QM) has the problem of lacking a coherent conceptual foundation, even if its quantitative algorithms are functionally adequate. This paper appraises the conceptual logic beneath quantum mechanics, using as the point of reference a novel alternative conceptual framework called the cordus conjecture. If the cordus conjecture is correct then the comparison suggests that quantum mechanics is conceptually fallacious in several areas: (1) Particles need not be zero-dimensional points after all. (2) Bell�s theorem is refuted as being not universally applicable, and the principle of locality also fails. (3) The wavefunction is a mathematical approximation of a deeper reality, and superposition is not a physical state. (4) Superposition confounds positional and causal (temporal) variability, and this causes the weirdness of the QM interpretations. (5) Cordus identifies the factors that cause decoherence and (6) explains why quantum mechanics does not scale up to macroscopic objects. (7) It is fallacious to consider fields and particles as independent phenomena. Instead they are closely coupled in the cordus, and this explains the measurement context. Several core principles of QM are thereby refuted. The paradox of Schr�dinger�s Cat is explained as an artefact of these flawed premises. The paper also explains why the mathematical machinery of quantum mechanics is a reasonable approximation to reality, even if the concepts are not. The mathematics works, at least within a certain scale-range where: (a) things look like particles and the proposed cordus structure is not evident (i.e. not too small) and (b) where body-coherence is attainable (i.e. not too large). Outside of that range quantum mechanics seems neither conceptually nor mathematically relevant. The same analysis predicts QM is unlikely to scale down to the next deeper level of physics. The implications are that QM is profoundly deficient in its conceptual foundations, and is only an approximation of a deeper and more logically consistent mechanics.