Interpreting Quantum Mechanics and Predictability in Terms of Facts About the Universe by Andrew Knight

Hi Andrew:

A very engaging and thought-provoking essay; I enjoyed reading it gave it high marks.

Interesting to know your MIT background; when were you there? I finished my Sc.D. in mechanical engineering there in 1974.

You correctly point to the fundamental deficiency in QM interpretations in that - "...If our intuition is correct that predictability of an

object depends on its description in phase space, but if

the state of an object is entirely specified in

configuration space, then the information necessary to

predict the object simply does not exist. On this basis

alone, many argue that the universe is fundamentally

unpredictable."

You may be interested in my essay - "Unravelling the Missing Physics behind Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability" by Avtar Singh, wherein I point to the fact that uncertainty and unpreditability are artifacts of measuring or predicting an inherently relativistic (V~C) phenomenon in classical fixed space-time coordinates.

I would deeply appreciate your feedback comments/rating on my essay integrating the relativistic effects into the well-known DeBroglie and HUP equations. Then, the universe also could be predicted as described in my referenced papers (see attached pdf files) in the essay.

Looking forward to hear your feedback,

Best Regards

Avtar SinghAttachment #1: 2_Published_Paper_in_Phy_Essays_Origin_of_Motion_Part_2_4Singh.pdfAttachment #2: 2_Published_Paper_in_Physics_Essays_Origin_of_Motion_Part_1_14Singh.pdf

I have shared it on Facebook, regards

Hello,

You are welcome. I am not sure that I will do this essay s Contest, my English is not perfect and I have difficulties to resume also.

Thanks for sharing also about the bool of Art Hobson, maybe I will read it. But if I can, I beleive that we cannot prove what is the main cause, I prefer personally the particles but it is just my opinion of course. It is logic :)

I consider 3D coded spheres and a super fluid , space , vacuum also made of coded 3D spheres and I beleive that all is the same but coded differently, that is why I have considered mainly 3 E8 and I have replaced the points or strings by finite series of 3D spheres having the same number than our cosmological finite serie of 3D spheres, they are coded and play between the zero absolute and the planck temperature, I have considered also the deformations of spheres and the Ricci flow and an assymetric Ricci flow also to explain the unique things, the lie derivatives, the euclidian and topological spaces and the poincare conjecture also.

Now you are going to encircle , the space disappears with a specific serie and primes with a central biggest sphere after we decrease the volumes and increase the number, 3 around the center, after 5 around the 3, after 7 around the 5 and we continue with this finite number the same than our cosmological serie, oddly we approach the dirac large number.

So I consider one main E8 coded for the space and after two others E8 and these spheres , one for the photons and one for the DM, they are just fuel permitting so the gravitation and the electromagnetism, I have reached this quantum gravitation even in changing the distances and mass because the standard is just emergent but we have a deeper logic, main codes farer.

So I respect also this Waves particles duality because we have a superfluid gravitational aether and these 3D spheres are in motions but they oscillate also and all is in contact, these series in my model of spherisation, an optimisation of the universal sphere or future sphere, are sent from the central cosmological sphere, it intrigues me a lot because for me it is there that something transforms the E in matters, coded.

You see like that the philosophical difference with the strings and the fact to consider only Waves and fields. For me it seems more logic because the strings and this 1D main Cosmic field and the 1D strings at this planck scale don t take into account the evolution. Best Regards and good luck for your essay that I liked a lot,

I thought about the primordial fractal of spheres and the number 2 is incredible when we consider 2 smaller spheres around the central one and not 3 , that create the dipoles and the distances can be assymetric even , we continue the fractal with the primes and when we consider the two fuels, photons and DM encoded in this fractal of space with the number finite corelated with the finite number of cosmological spheres, wowww that becomes intriguing and universal, this prime the number 2 is fascinating considering this primordial serie

personally I don t understand why the majority of thinkers are in this prison like if we had only photons like main piece , I understand why they insist on strings even to create this reality, it is odd for me because we have still many secrets to encircle and add, I doubt that this universe beyond the physicality is an infinite heat you know that this thing oscillates the photons to create our topologies, geonetries, matters and properties, I see an infinite energy but totally different than a heat, I beleive that it is an energy above our understanding able to create with the matters all the energies inside the physicality, the energy is more than we can imagine, Einstein and Witten have created a prison, philosophical and physical for me and now all try to understand only this photonic reality forgetting to Think beyond the box, in 100 years of relativity , frankly it is odd , like if we had understood with this the generality of this universe??? is it a joke , the universe is more than this simply and it seems logic.

Dear Andrew,

This was a nice and thought provoking essay.

It seems naive but I really liked your definition of a fact!

I would have a couple of questions though, as it seems that some things are escaping my understanding:

- First, it is not clear to me what really constitutes a superposition. From the example you gave I do not see the difference between superposition (with possibility of interference) and simply not knowing all facts (tossing a coin). Can you please clarify on this?

- Second, at the very end you discuss the fact "it rained yesterday" and the various traces that would follow even many years after. I appreciate that this is a microscopic world view but what of the 2nd law of thermodynamics?

- Third. It is more a comment but your definition of fact and the following detailed example with particles reminded me of simulation method called Event Driven Molecular Dynamics (https://academic.oup.com/ptps/article/doi/10.1143/PTPS.178.5/1869834) which literally implements what you describe in your essay. Are you familiar with this method? Do you see any way of using it to emulate the kind of things (e.g. entanglement, superposition) in your essay?

Many thanks.

Best,

Fabien

Andrew,

Thank you for your reply.

I suppose my 2nd question was precisely on the blatant incompatibility between the reversibility of the microphysical laws (based on Hamiltonian mechanics) and the irreversibility of macrfphysical observables such as "raining".

This is not at all an original question. It reminds me of the objection from Loschmidt to Boltzmann's H theorem relying on uncorrelated velocities where Loschmidt observed that you could in principle reverse all velocities and the entropy should decrease accordingly (since it was increasing with time for the "forward process"). Boltzmann would have allegedly replied "go on reverse the particles velocities".

What I am saying is that I am not convinced that, even in principle, events leave measurable traces of their happening at all later times.

Even a three body problem is already not reversible even when people try hard (https://www.sciencealert.com/three-black-holes-orbiting-each-other-can-t-always-go-backwards-in-time).

This is just a thought if you think that can help you improve upon your argument against this concern.

Cheers.

Fabien

There is a theoretical model that can compete with both quantum mechanics and Newtonian mechanics

Please take a look at my essay A grand Introduction to Darwinian mechanic

https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3549

Dear Andrew,

I greatly appreciated your work and discussion. I am very glad that you are not thinking in abstract patterns.

"A fact (or event) occurs exactly when the number or density of future possibilities decreases, and a quantum superposition exists if and only if the facts of the universe are consistent with the superposition. The interpretation sheds light on both in-principle and real-world predictability of the universe".

While the discussion lasted, I wrote an article: "Practical guidance on calculating resonant frequencies at four levels of diagnosis and inactivation of COVID-19 coronavirus", due to the high relevance of this topic. The work is based on the practical solution of problems in quantum mechanics, presented in the essay FQXi 2019-2020 "Universal quantum laws of the universe to solve the problems of unsolvability, computability and unpredictability".

I hope that my modest results of work will provide you with information for thought.

Warm Regards, `

Vladimir