Essay Abstract

In this paper we begin by discussing the ultimate possibilities in physics. We then continue with a brief review of quantum mechanics and the history of action principles including a recent proposition of a universal action reservoir. We then move on to define a new least action principle for classical physics: a stochastic least action principle. We show that this principle yields the same result as Feynman's approach to quantum mechanics. We also show that it corresponds to classical physics in the case of S >> \hbar. As an example of the stochastic least action principle we apply it to the Einstein-Hilbert action of general relativity and obtain a form of quantum gravity. We also hint a stochastic differential equation approach to action based on the stochastic least action principle. In conclusion we discuss possible connections between our approach and other theories. Finally we return to discuss the open possibilities in physics.

Author Bio

Joakim Munkhammar is an independent researcher who holds a double masters degree in mathematics and astrophysics from Uppsala University 2008. He has published several reports and papers in pure- and applied mathematics and astrophysics. His current research interests include approaches to quantum theory and the unification of general relativity with electromagnetism.

Download Essay PDF File

10 days later

Dear Joakim David Munkhammar,

Of course as per Albert Einstein's statement, 'I am convinced God does not play dice' the probabilistic physics to deterministic physics may be the ultimate possibility in physics. But the search for hidden variables is the big constrain in Quantum Mechanics. We may have a long road map ahead to explore the Nature and in that also least action principle and path integral formulation are applicable, good...

With Best wishes

Jayakar

    Dear Jayakar Johnson Joseph,

    I believe that the final theory of Quantum Mechanics will be surprisingly elegant. Perhaps it is deterministic, perhaps it is not. Perhaps determinisism is not fully understood, in anyway we just got to keep looking.

    Best Wishes

    Joakim

      • [deleted]

      • Post #4

      Hi dear Joakim David Munkhammar,

      Very interesting ,of course God doesn't play dice ,and he dislikes too the publicity ,hihihi I am laughing of course ,a little humor is good for fundamenatl researchs .

      What I say is simple ,insert the fundamentals and invariances ,coherences and constants .

      Thus the rotating spheres .

      The gravity ,the mass is directly linked with this fundamenatl .

      I see a kind of Mach principle ,mix with a little of general relativity more imaginaries ....conclusions ,error ,sorry !But I say that frankly .

      I congratulate you for the serie of 10 from the public ,hum well well well .

      I invite you to insert fundamenatls ,really .Your quantum gravity is false ,simply .

      The quantum gravity is the rotations of spheres ....the mass thus the link with general relativity and ther increase by evolution thus the space curves itself .It's that the general relativity ,now let's see the gravitational waves and the proof of this reality .

      Let's continue towards the truth .

      Sincerely

      Steve

      Dear Steve,

      thanks for commenting on my paper. I had a hard time understanding what you wrote, but if it is on rotating spheres in connection with general relativity, perhaps gravitomagnetism is something for you to dig in to (effects of rotating spheres for example):

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitomagnetism

      This is also pretty much the source of gravitational waves as well, much in the same way as for light in electrodynamics.

      /Joakim

      • [deleted]

      • Post #6

      Hello Joakim,

      It's likeable ,I am going to read it .Indeed the rotations are an effect of the ultim entropy

      Don't worry about my writings ,I like catalyze the threads and my English must be improved hihih .

      Sincerely,I invite you to insert the spheres ,fundamentals ,like I said a fundamental theory evolves .

      The Theory of spherisation is a gauge and we can find details .

      With ou without the agreements of people ,this theory will rest .

      The spherisation is fundamental ,all goes to spherisation ,it's logic ,basic ,rational and pragmatic .

      The gravitational spherical waves have effects on the space and the rotations thus implyiong mass with the evolution increases the curvatures thus the complexity of the universal sphere and its spheres .

      I agree about the general relativity and its laws ....the space curves itself by mass and its increasing .

      The general relativity must insert the evolution point of vue ,thus the polarisation with these rotating spheres in my opinion must be inserted.

      The origin of mass is the secret and the rotating entangled quantum spheres with the time is this mass with their specificities .

      Sincerely

      Steve

      • [deleted]

      • Post #7

      Hello Joakim ,

      Could you tell me more about this interesting gravitomagnetism .

      What do you think about the idea of Mr Baten about the protofields .

      It's relevant in my opinion about the rotations ,the senses ,the angles ,the directions ,the velocities ,the orbitals ....and thus the polarity .

      Regards

      Steve

      11 days later

      Dear Joakim,

      I like how you shed light on one fundamental principle with different perspectives. This helps to gain new insight. I think I'll have to read your essay quietly three or four times in order to have a better understanding. At first read, I have the following questions: aren't you just counter Wick-rotating Feynmans least action principle and writing entropy in a new unit? When S_i goes to infinity you retrieve classical mechanics, but when S_i is of the order of a few h-bar, does your stochastic action principle have sense as you've lost the quantum interference effects of the complex exponential? I don't see for which experiments your principle can be of value in the quantum domain.

      By the way, I promote the FQXi contest on my twitter profile and my blog. Would you mind if I post a quote of yours, linking to your essay?

      Regards,

      Arjen

      Dear Arjen,

      thanks for your most valuable comment. The idea of the stochastic least action principle is to eliminate the need for an action principle coupled with an additional principle for quantum mechanics. As this theory is equivalent to quantum mechanics in its current setup I am not sure if it gives any new direct testable predictions (other than the ones in quantum mechanics). I don't think I have lost any quantum effects when S_i is finite. The Wick rotation on the quantum wave function creates an ensemble of actions. The other way around is that the stochastic least action principle on regular mechanics creates a fundamental uncertainty in the action of a system. Only upon observation the action revealed, before that it is fundamentally hidden. So in an interference situation (eg double slit experiment) the stochastic least action principle merely states that the particle has a weighted probability of travelling all paths (actions) through this slit. Under Wick rotation this is equivalent to Feynmann's approach to quantum mechanics and should thus have the same dynamics.

      The expected action from the stochastic least action principle is indeed sort of an entropy with a different unit.

      Perhaps the truly interesting stuff happens if one investigates the stochastic differential equation approach. That is an open problem as of now.

      I hope I have given you some adequate information.

      Feel free to post anything on your blog/twitter!

      Best Wishes

      /Joakim

      • [deleted]

      • Post #10

      Dear Joakim ,

      I inform me a little about this gravitomagnetism ,it's interesting,the similarities with Maxwell and GEM equations seem relavant if the synchronization is made with fundamentals and the correct number .All is there the correct number and its serie of course .

      You give some ideas for my activation concept thus acceleration towards a stable rotations of quantum spheres .This Dark matter is relevant about the evolution and the contraction of our Universe and the polarisations .I must link the orbitals rot ,the spin rot ,the acceleration ,the waves and the mass of course .

      The differences at the Planck Scale between the gravity and the electro magnetism are very relevant too .There The ideas of Mr Baten can be correlated too .The mobility and the rotations thus is specific .

      The ratio of Mr Klingman in his essay between interactions is relevant too for a real taxonomy and a real topology .

      Best Regards

      Steve

      7 days later

      • [deleted]

      • Post #11

      Steve and Joakim,

      We handle the analytic continuation of a Euclidean path integral* to recover a probability amplitude from a partition function in order to treat the twin-slit experiment in an arXiv paper. Thanks, Joakim, for pointing out the Lisi paper, it was just what we needed to get from the graphical formalism to the quantum and classical in our program!

      Mark

      *That is, Wick rotated. Joakim, you call this Minkowski, but Zee calls it Euclidean. I'm using Zee's nomenclature here and in the arXiv paper.

      • [deleted]

      • Post #12

      Dear Mr Mark Stuckey,

      Nice to know you .

      My point of vue is this one .

      Here with the contest ,I see many systems extrapolated with Lie Algebras and complexs ,octonions ,quaternions etc etc ...all that is imaginary ,it doesn't exist HIGGS ,extradimensions ,multiverses ,hidden variables.....

      These extrapolations are too simple and too complex with its derivations .The symmetry is false

      Why beause each sphere is specific thus the symmetry is specific .

      If a balance isn't made ,it's impossible .

      Only 3D and a constant of evolution where the mass becomes .

      A physical model is different than a mathematical model .Only the physicality is important ,the maths are a tool .A very good tool but without a balance between imaginaries and reals ,it's impossible ...these extrapolations are falses .

      A real theory evoves and completes the fundamentals ,our laws .The constants ,the coherences .....

      I am very surprised that the sciences community don't focus more on fundamentals .A real work continues and evolves .

      In conclusion ,an axiomatisation ,a physical formalization takes all its sense when the balance is made .Without that it's a lost of time .

      It doesn't exist higgs ,extradimensions ,strings ,multiverses,hidden variables,bizares particles...no our system is simple ....the rotating spheres .the number is specific .all must be classed with pragmatism ,a real topology exists ,not these imaginaries .

      Best Regards

      Steve

      • [deleted]

      • Post #13

      Hello all ,

      sorry to derivate dear Joakim David Munkhammar on your blog,

      I just finish .

      The origin of mass is simple ,complex and simple .

      Complex in its combinations.

      Simple in its system .

      The rotating spheres imply all ,and imply the mass too .We needs a physicality ,and this physicality must be correlated with our constants and fundamenatls laws ,

      the quantum mechanics ,our perceptive system and our cosmological dimension are under the same laws ,with variables of thermodynamics and evolution .

      Best Regards

      Steve

      Dear Mark,

      glad to have been helpful. I wish you good luck in your pursuit of a better foundation for QFT.

      Joakim

      Steve,

      I make no sense what so ever out of your posts. I don't think physics is composed of only "rotating spheres" and if it was it would be explained by equations. Thus write it in equational form and from there we could debate it. By the way, since you asked for it, all information that one could possibly want about gravitomagnetism is located on the wiki site (or in links from there, in particular Mashhoon's papers).

      Joakim

      • [deleted]

      • Post #16

      Joakim ,

      I invite you to see the whole in all centers of interest,you shall see spheres everywhere .Al equations must be adapted ,if not it's a lost of time .

      Thanks for the link ,interesting the gravitomagnetism .

      Regards

      Steve

      • [deleted]

      • Post #17

      Dear Joakim ,

      It's nice your kind of thoughts.

      I d like add something .

      When you develop an equation ,I invite you to insert fundamenatsl correlated with our physicality .If not your equations are falses like imaginaries .

      You know the thermodynamics PV =n RT ...More the mass ,mc²....G mm'/r²..or F=ma ...and many others with a good referential with good limits ....in all serie you must insert fundamentals and rationals .

      Even when you calculate dear Joakim ,with Fourier ,euler ,pythagore,ostrogradski,dirac,and many others all depends of your referential .There thus it exists two kinds of maths ,falses or trues ,physically speaking .

      The velocity of rotating spheres est proportional with the mass ,m v simply with a complexity in the details of synchronization .

      Now I shut up and I calculate the rotating spheres hihihi

      Regards

      Steve

      3 years later

      Nice quote from Einstein. May be you are interested in having a look at 5-dimensional universe, an essay at http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1326

      PicoPhysics is a deterministic theory and resolves most of issues resolved using probability in mainstream physics.

      Look forwrad to your comments and evaluation of the essay.

      Vijay Gupta

      Good morning Jayakar,

      You are correct. Finally Quantum Mechanics is surprisingly elegant. Based out of single three word sentence 'Space Contain Energy'. You are invited to review my essay at http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1326

      Look forwrad to your comments and evaluation of the essay.

      Vijay Gupta

      Write a Reply...