If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home

Current Essay Contest

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

Previous Contests

**Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest**

*December 24, 2019 - April 24, 2020*

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

read/discuss • winners

**What Is “Fundamental”**

*October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018*

*Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation*

read/discuss • winners

**Wandering Towards a Goal**

How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?

*December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017*

Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

read/discuss • winners

**Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics**

*Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation*

Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discuss • winners

**How Should Humanity Steer the Future?**

*January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014*

*Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**It From Bit or Bit From It**

*March 25 - June 28, 2013*

*Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**Questioning the Foundations**

Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?

*May 24 - August 31, 2012*

*Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**Is Reality Digital or Analog?**

*November 2010 - February 2011*

*Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American*

read/discuss • winners

**What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?**

*May - October 2009*

*Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams*

read/discuss • winners

**The Nature of Time**

*August - December 2008*

read/discuss • winners

Current Essay Contest

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

Previous Contests

Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?

Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

read/discuss • winners

Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

read/discuss • winners

Forum Home

Introduction

Terms of Use

RSS feed | RSS help

Introduction

Terms of Use

*Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.*

RSS feed | RSS help

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

**Del Rajan**: *on* 7/11/20 at 10:48am UTC, wrote Dear Marco, Sorry about the delayed response. The essay contest closed...

**MARCO BORRELLI**: *on* 7/2/20 at 3:57am UTC, wrote Hi sorry if I repeat my comment but I noticed errors in my English...

**MARCO BORRELLI**: *on* 7/1/20 at 19:18pm UTC, wrote Hi Del Rajan, I read your essay with great interest. Compression is very...

**Del Rajan**: *on* 5/19/20 at 11:16am UTC, wrote Dear Adel, Thank you for your time to read the essay and your comments. ...

**adel sadeq**: *on* 5/19/20 at 0:17am UTC, wrote BTW, my system seem to agree with this interpretation, but not exactly in...

**adel sadeq**: *on* 5/19/20 at 0:02am UTC, wrote Dear Del, I have wished that all the essays concentrated on...

**Del Rajan**: *on* 5/18/20 at 9:01am UTC, wrote Dear Professor Davies, I greatly appreciate your time and your comments...

**Paul Davies**: *on* 5/17/20 at 23:07pm UTC, wrote I have a comment and a question. The Born rule is tacked onto quantum...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

**Lorraine Ford**: "(continued) 2. Physics has assumed that bottom-up causation IS top-down..."
*in* The Present State of...

**Lorraine Ford**: "1. Physics can’t tell you why the world ever moves, i.e. physics assumes..."
*in* The Present State of...

**Georgina Woodward**: "Max? Why?"
*in* Anatomy of spacetime and...

**Steve Agnew**: "Mueller opens his essay with... "As the argument goes, there are truths..."
*in* Undecidability,...

**Dr Narayan Bhadra**: "All the Honourable Scientists are cordially requested to feedback that we..."
*in* Undecidability,...

**Georgina Woodward**: "The mass of the lion entity is not divided between different areas of high..."
*in* Anatomy of spacetime and...

**Jim Snowdon**: "Since evolving on our rapidly rotating planet, we have used it`s rotational..."
*in* The Quantum Clock-Maker...

**Steve Dufourny**: "a general universal clock of evolution irreversible correlated for me with..."
*in* The Quantum Clock-Maker...

RECENT ARTICLES

*click titles to read articles*

**The Quantum Clock-Maker Investigating COVID-19, Causality, and the Trouble with AI**

Sally Shrapnel, a quantum physicist and medical practitioner, on her experiments into cause-and-effect that could help us understand time’s arrow—and build better healthcare algorithms.

**Connect the Quantum Dots for a New Kind of Fuel**

'Artificial atoms' allow physicists to manipulate individual electrons—and could help to reduce energy wastage in electronic devices.

**Can Choices Curve Spacetime?**

Two teams are developing ways to detect quantum-gravitational effects in the lab.

**The Quantum Engine That Simultaneously Heats and Cools **

Tiny device could help boost quantum electronics.

**The Quantum Refrigerator**

A tiny cooling device could help rewrite the thermodynamic rule book for quantum machines.

RECENT FORUM POSTS

RECENT ARTICLES

Sally Shrapnel, a quantum physicist and medical practitioner, on her experiments into cause-and-effect that could help us understand time’s arrow—and build better healthcare algorithms.

'Artificial atoms' allow physicists to manipulate individual electrons—and could help to reduce energy wastage in electronic devices.

Two teams are developing ways to detect quantum-gravitational effects in the lab.

Tiny device could help boost quantum electronics.

A tiny cooling device could help rewrite the thermodynamic rule book for quantum machines.

FQXi FORUM

September 19, 2021

CATEGORY:
Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest (2019-2020)
[back]

TOPIC: Does God play dice with time itself? by Del Rajan [refresh]

TOPIC: Does God play dice with time itself? by Del Rajan [refresh]

Gödel's undecidability results showed the incompleteness of formal axiomatic systems. A more concrete demonstration of incompleteness is predicated on Turing's work on uncomputability. Perhaps the most illuminating reason for incompleteness can be seen through algorithmic information theory where Chaitin used incompressibility. Rather remarkably, incompressibilty highlights that incompleteness can be treated to be pervasive phenomenon throughout pure mathematics. Using this work, Chaitin has pointed out that compression can be generalized to a universal concept. In align with this, we argue to embrace compression as a primary method in physics akin to the geometrization of physics in the 20th century. To warrant such a direction, we examine how compression already exists at a foundational level in current information theories associated to physical systems (both classical and quantum). We proceed to argue that applying the concept of compression to the structure of spacetime provides us with a novel path forward in fundamental physics, which includes addressing the conceptual problems in quantum physics where "God plays dice." We provide speculative mathematical ideas for how such a spacetime-information theory could be developed. This alludes to the notion that time itself is intrinsically random.

Del Rajan is a quantum information scientist at the Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand.

Respected Professor Del Rajan,

Your well understood and well studied words...... Theoretical problem: What do the complex amplitudes represent?..........

That is a real question. Can we avoid fully those complex numbers? as the results will be complex and can not be physically placed.

Hope you will have a look at my essay "** A properly deciding, Computing and Predicting new theory’s Philosophy" ---- which described Dynamic Universe Model** ; where complex numbers are avoided and got many nice results, and many predictions came true....

Best regards

=snp

report post as inappropriate

Your well understood and well studied words...... Theoretical problem: What do the complex amplitudes represent?..........

That is a real question. Can we avoid fully those complex numbers? as the results will be complex and can not be physically placed.

Hope you will have a look at my essay "

Best regards

=snp

report post as inappropriate

Dear Del,

I read with great interest your essay with deep ideas and conclusions aimed at overcoming the crisis of understanding in the philosophical basis of fundamental science. First of all, I want to note these thoughts, which, in my opinion, are important for finding a way to understand the structure of the Universe, the nature of the phenomenon of information:

“Crudely stated, progress was measured in every parameter except understanding. It is our view that an understanding of quantum physics is necessary for genuine progress. ”

“Mathematically modeling the physical world without deep understanding can be compared to machine translation without comprehension. Only with the addition of understanding in our physics can we regard ourselves as an advancing intelligent species. ”

"...we want to harness compression as a primary mathematical technique for the aim to make deeper discoveries of the physical world."

"Our view to resolve the confusion is remove the focus on information in information theories. Rather it is compression in these theories that is fundamental, and whose character we imagine will be found in the deeper laws of the Universe."

I believe that in order to overcome the crisis of understanding in the basis of fundamental science, it is important to remember the philosophical covenant of Paul Florensky:. “We repeat: worldunderstanding is spaceunderstanding.” My high score. I wish you success!

I invite you to see my ideas .

With kind regards,

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

I read with great interest your essay with deep ideas and conclusions aimed at overcoming the crisis of understanding in the philosophical basis of fundamental science. First of all, I want to note these thoughts, which, in my opinion, are important for finding a way to understand the structure of the Universe, the nature of the phenomenon of information:

“Crudely stated, progress was measured in every parameter except understanding. It is our view that an understanding of quantum physics is necessary for genuine progress. ”

“Mathematically modeling the physical world without deep understanding can be compared to machine translation without comprehension. Only with the addition of understanding in our physics can we regard ourselves as an advancing intelligent species. ”

"...we want to harness compression as a primary mathematical technique for the aim to make deeper discoveries of the physical world."

"Our view to resolve the confusion is remove the focus on information in information theories. Rather it is compression in these theories that is fundamental, and whose character we imagine will be found in the deeper laws of the Universe."

I believe that in order to overcome the crisis of understanding in the basis of fundamental science, it is important to remember the philosophical covenant of Paul Florensky:. “We repeat: worldunderstanding is spaceunderstanding.” My high score. I wish you success!

I invite you to see my ideas .

With kind regards,

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Dear Vladimir,

Thank you for your message. To elaborate on the points you mentioned:

Modern derivations of incompleteness are found in algorithmic information theory (AIT). Central in these derivation is compression.

Furthermore both classical and quantum information theory state compression as the fundamental result through their coding theorems. Information theories seem to be about compression, not information.

If we assert that the Universe is made of information, then an educated guess is that compression is to be found in its deeper laws.

Perhaps the advancements on incompleteness (namely AIT) provides a better scaffold for fundamental physics than harnessing the frontiers of geometry/topology.

I will read your essay. Thank you again for your time and your most kind comments.

Cheers,

Del

Thank you for your message. To elaborate on the points you mentioned:

Modern derivations of incompleteness are found in algorithmic information theory (AIT). Central in these derivation is compression.

Furthermore both classical and quantum information theory state compression as the fundamental result through their coding theorems. Information theories seem to be about compression, not information.

If we assert that the Universe is made of information, then an educated guess is that compression is to be found in its deeper laws.

Perhaps the advancements on incompleteness (namely AIT) provides a better scaffold for fundamental physics than harnessing the frontiers of geometry/topology.

I will read your essay. Thank you again for your time and your most kind comments.

Cheers,

Del

Dear Del (if I may),

thanks for a grat essay, well-argued and full of inspiring ideas. I liked your didactical crystal clear introduction to quantum theory and information theory. I appreciate very much your motivation for "understanding" as opposed to the notorious "shut up and calculate" (I have myself written several works about this, also from the historical point of view). Also, your genius idea is to abond the widespread "conventionalism" (as Popper colled it) of "wonder at the austerely

beautiful simplicity of the world as revealed in the laws of physics" as a research program, and substitute it by randomness. If you will have time to read my essay, you will see that my research program with Nicolas Gisin make use exactly of Kolmogorov complexity to find fundamental limits in physics and propose suitable alternatives. I will be most interesed in your feedback.

Meanwhile, I give your essay a top rating, being among the best I read this year.

All good wishes and good luck with the contest!

Flavio

report post as inappropriate

thanks for a grat essay, well-argued and full of inspiring ideas. I liked your didactical crystal clear introduction to quantum theory and information theory. I appreciate very much your motivation for "understanding" as opposed to the notorious "shut up and calculate" (I have myself written several works about this, also from the historical point of view). Also, your genius idea is to abond the widespread "conventionalism" (as Popper colled it) of "wonder at the austerely

beautiful simplicity of the world as revealed in the laws of physics" as a research program, and substitute it by randomness. If you will have time to read my essay, you will see that my research program with Nicolas Gisin make use exactly of Kolmogorov complexity to find fundamental limits in physics and propose suitable alternatives. I will be most interesed in your feedback.

Meanwhile, I give your essay a top rating, being among the best I read this year.

All good wishes and good luck with the contest!

Flavio

report post as inappropriate

Dear Flavio,

Thank you for your time to read the essay and your most kind comments.

It is quite interesting that the technological aims of the 20th century provided a basis for 'shut up and calculate' whereas in this century the technological development associated to quantum information makes it difficult for this attitude to be unchallenged.

I am very interested to read your work on integrating the Komogorov complexity with physics. It certainly sounds like an innovative path and an exciting exploration.

I will most certainly read your essay and good luck with the contest.

Cheers,

Del

Thank you for your time to read the essay and your most kind comments.

It is quite interesting that the technological aims of the 20th century provided a basis for 'shut up and calculate' whereas in this century the technological development associated to quantum information makes it difficult for this attitude to be unchallenged.

I am very interested to read your work on integrating the Komogorov complexity with physics. It certainly sounds like an innovative path and an exciting exploration.

I will most certainly read your essay and good luck with the contest.

Cheers,

Del

Dear Del Rajan ,

A truly excellent and enjoyable essay!

You make so many wonderful observations, connecting lack of physical evidence to support various views and inability to derive the Born Rule, lack of evidence to support the assumption that non-locality is false, and finally, “*nobody knows what quantum information is.*” that I must restrain myself from expounding on each of these. Instead I will focus on what seems to be your main hypothesis, that, at a deep level the Universe is random. Several current essays relate to,this assumption.

First, John Bell stated

“*No one can understand this [deBroglie] theory until he is willing to think of psi as a real objective field rather than just a ‘probability amplitude’.*”

If one assumes, as I do, that this physical field is self-interactive, then it is essentially non-linear. Bill McHarris’s essay points out that:

“*the behavior of simple but non-linear classical dynamical systems...can be startlingly similar to quantum mechanical systems in multitudinous ways.*”

This implies an essentially non-algorithmic system, and Schultz’s essay claims that the limitations on knowability [the ‘no-go’ theorems] do not apply to non-algorithmic patterns.

Your compression ideas are fascinating, and require some digesting. In the mean time I invite you to read my current essay, Deciding on the nature of time and space, and welcome your comments.

Best regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

report post as inappropriate

A truly excellent and enjoyable essay!

You make so many wonderful observations, connecting lack of physical evidence to support various views and inability to derive the Born Rule, lack of evidence to support the assumption that non-locality is false, and finally, “

First, John Bell stated

“

If one assumes, as I do, that this physical field is self-interactive, then it is essentially non-linear. Bill McHarris’s essay points out that:

“

This implies an essentially non-algorithmic system, and Schultz’s essay claims that the limitations on knowability [the ‘no-go’ theorems] do not apply to non-algorithmic patterns.

Your compression ideas are fascinating, and require some digesting. In the mean time I invite you to read my current essay, Deciding on the nature of time and space, and welcome your comments.

Best regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

report post as inappropriate

Dear Edwin Eugene Klingman,

Thank you for your time and for your kind feedback.

In regards to your comments regarding non-locality and aspects on quantum information, a further interesting point would be the PBR theorem. It is profound in that it looks at the reality of quantum information, or alternatively introduces a non-locality far more stranger than Bell non-locality.

Thank you for pointing me towards your essay. I will read it and good luck for the contest.

Cheers,

Del

Thank you for your time and for your kind feedback.

In regards to your comments regarding non-locality and aspects on quantum information, a further interesting point would be the PBR theorem. It is profound in that it looks at the reality of quantum information, or alternatively introduces a non-locality far more stranger than Bell non-locality.

Thank you for pointing me towards your essay. I will read it and good luck for the contest.

Cheers,

Del

Dear Del,

Great essay. One of the most interesting ones for sure.

I find it interesting how you made the connection between compression and the structure of spacetime itself. In my essay (https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3523) I use similar notions of compression in a slightly different way, combined with finitist notions. You might be interested in taking a look at it.

All the best,

Rafael

report post as inappropriate

Great essay. One of the most interesting ones for sure.

I find it interesting how you made the connection between compression and the structure of spacetime itself. In my essay (https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3523) I use similar notions of compression in a slightly different way, combined with finitist notions. You might be interested in taking a look at it.

All the best,

Rafael

report post as inappropriate

Dear Rafael,

Thank you for your time to read the essay. I appreciate the kind feedback.

Yes I am very interested in the connection. What I imagine would be interesting (in relation to spacetime) would be looking at the concept of compression in relativistic quantum information (RQI). Whether an RQI version of Schumacher's coding theorem would give a novel insight into spacetime.

I will most certainly be interested to read your essay and its utilization of compression.

Cheers,

Del

Thank you for your time to read the essay. I appreciate the kind feedback.

Yes I am very interested in the connection. What I imagine would be interesting (in relation to spacetime) would be looking at the concept of compression in relativistic quantum information (RQI). Whether an RQI version of Schumacher's coding theorem would give a novel insight into spacetime.

I will most certainly be interested to read your essay and its utilization of compression.

Cheers,

Del

Dear Del,

Congratulations for your interesting and very well written essay.

I completely relate with your argument that an esthetic principle, as the one of Dirac's, is not enough. And your ''principle of mathematical randomness'', i.e. taking randomness as fundamental, seems (to me) to be one of the best tracks to move forward. I also enjoyed your proposition to focus on compression rather than information, and your proposal on typical and atypical time is really interesting. Working on quantum causality on quantum indefinite causal orders, I would have liked to have an analysis of these compared to your ideas.

"The emergence of time in this intrinsic random manner suggests that God not only plays dice but plays dice all the time and with time itself." My essay aims at arguing for the fact that quantum "paradoxes" might emerge from self-referential issues (i.e. God does play dice, and this fundamental randomness in quantum theory as a source which might be analog to the undecidable propositions in mathematical logic). As an epilogue, I propose a (not very developped) intuition that time itself might emerge from self-referential structures. If you have the time to read it, I would be very interested to have your feedbacks on it.

All the best,

Hippolyte

PS : Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that you identify the Copenhagen interpretation with "shut up and calculate". However, there are rather Copenhagen interpretationS (nuances between Bohr, Heisenberg, Pauli... views) and they do not defend the "shut up and calculate" view, but rather refined forms of realisms, that could be said to be carefully based on structures and relations (cf. the section "The Heirs of Copenhagen" in my essay).

report post as inappropriate

Congratulations for your interesting and very well written essay.

I completely relate with your argument that an esthetic principle, as the one of Dirac's, is not enough. And your ''principle of mathematical randomness'', i.e. taking randomness as fundamental, seems (to me) to be one of the best tracks to move forward. I also enjoyed your proposition to focus on compression rather than information, and your proposal on typical and atypical time is really interesting. Working on quantum causality on quantum indefinite causal orders, I would have liked to have an analysis of these compared to your ideas.

"The emergence of time in this intrinsic random manner suggests that God not only plays dice but plays dice all the time and with time itself." My essay aims at arguing for the fact that quantum "paradoxes" might emerge from self-referential issues (i.e. God does play dice, and this fundamental randomness in quantum theory as a source which might be analog to the undecidable propositions in mathematical logic). As an epilogue, I propose a (not very developped) intuition that time itself might emerge from self-referential structures. If you have the time to read it, I would be very interested to have your feedbacks on it.

All the best,

Hippolyte

PS : Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that you identify the Copenhagen interpretation with "shut up and calculate". However, there are rather Copenhagen interpretationS (nuances between Bohr, Heisenberg, Pauli... views) and they do not defend the "shut up and calculate" view, but rather refined forms of realisms, that could be said to be carefully based on structures and relations (cf. the section "The Heirs of Copenhagen" in my essay).

report post as inappropriate

Dear Hippolyte,

Thank you for taking the time to read my essay. I appreciate your kind comments and critical feedback. To elaborate on some of your points:

1. Indefinite causal structures: The theory put forth with the process operator and its extension to graphs via quantum causal models is of great interest to me. Besides the quantum switch concepts, I feel quantum causal models may provide a basis for novel information-theoretic applications (especially in distributed algorithms). More fundamentally, the notion of unordered time which I briefly mention in the essay can be related to some formal concepts in their theory, and I do provide a reference to the recent Bell's theorem for temporal order.

2. Copenagen interpretation: As mentioned in the essay, there is no consensus on what the intepretation states (there are various versions) but that the overarching theme is that a description beyond quantum theory is not needed. I mention 'shut up and calculate' as a refined version of the latter theme given it has the commonality of ignoring a desire for a deeper description. I also provide a reference to David Kaiser's article on the historical inception of the 'shut up and calculate' mindset.

I will be most interested to read your essay and the idea that time may emerge from self-referential structures. Thank you for that and I will have a read.

Cheers,

Del

Thank you for taking the time to read my essay. I appreciate your kind comments and critical feedback. To elaborate on some of your points:

1. Indefinite causal structures: The theory put forth with the process operator and its extension to graphs via quantum causal models is of great interest to me. Besides the quantum switch concepts, I feel quantum causal models may provide a basis for novel information-theoretic applications (especially in distributed algorithms). More fundamentally, the notion of unordered time which I briefly mention in the essay can be related to some formal concepts in their theory, and I do provide a reference to the recent Bell's theorem for temporal order.

2. Copenagen interpretation: As mentioned in the essay, there is no consensus on what the intepretation states (there are various versions) but that the overarching theme is that a description beyond quantum theory is not needed. I mention 'shut up and calculate' as a refined version of the latter theme given it has the commonality of ignoring a desire for a deeper description. I also provide a reference to David Kaiser's article on the historical inception of the 'shut up and calculate' mindset.

I will be most interested to read your essay and the idea that time may emerge from self-referential structures. Thank you for that and I will have a read.

Cheers,

Del

Dear Dr. Rajan,

Your essay is beautifully written and a pleasure to read. You ask all the good questions about quantum mechanics - whether randomness is fundamental, the origin of the Born probability rule, the possibility of there being randomness in time, and the deep foundational issues that plague quantum gravity research.

I wanted to mention here that there has been much progress on these questions, in a manner which moved away from `shut up and calculate'. It started with the Ghirardi-Weber-Rimini-Pearle theory of spontaneous localisation in 1986. They provided a falsifiable and dynamical explanation of the quantum measurement problem, and of the absence of macroscopic superpositions. The theory is currently being tested in a few labs in Europe.

Subsequently, Stephen Adler sought to derive quantum theory from a deeper underlying formalism - his theory of trace dynamics. The deeper theory is a deterministic matrix dynamics from where quantum theory, Born rule, randomness, and spontaneous localisation are emergent phenomena.

Recently, I have shown how to include gravity in Adler's framework, using the mathematics of non-commutative geometry. This has lead to the new theory of Spontaneous Quantum Gravity, where indeed God plays dice with time, but only in an emergent sense. Underlying quantum indeterminism is determinism at the Planck scale.

I discuss these developments in my essay in this contest: The pollen and the electron. Since many of the deep questions you raise are addessed and answered in my work, I hope you will find it interesting.

My best wishes to you in this contest,

Tejinder.

report post as inappropriate

Your essay is beautifully written and a pleasure to read. You ask all the good questions about quantum mechanics - whether randomness is fundamental, the origin of the Born probability rule, the possibility of there being randomness in time, and the deep foundational issues that plague quantum gravity research.

I wanted to mention here that there has been much progress on these questions, in a manner which moved away from `shut up and calculate'. It started with the Ghirardi-Weber-Rimini-Pearle theory of spontaneous localisation in 1986. They provided a falsifiable and dynamical explanation of the quantum measurement problem, and of the absence of macroscopic superpositions. The theory is currently being tested in a few labs in Europe.

Subsequently, Stephen Adler sought to derive quantum theory from a deeper underlying formalism - his theory of trace dynamics. The deeper theory is a deterministic matrix dynamics from where quantum theory, Born rule, randomness, and spontaneous localisation are emergent phenomena.

Recently, I have shown how to include gravity in Adler's framework, using the mathematics of non-commutative geometry. This has lead to the new theory of Spontaneous Quantum Gravity, where indeed God plays dice with time, but only in an emergent sense. Underlying quantum indeterminism is determinism at the Planck scale.

I discuss these developments in my essay in this contest: The pollen and the electron. Since many of the deep questions you raise are addessed and answered in my work, I hope you will find it interesting.

My best wishes to you in this contest,

Tejinder.

report post as inappropriate

My apologies. The anonymous in the previous post is me...I forgot to log in. Sorry!

Tejinder

report post as inappropriate

Tejinder

report post as inappropriate

Dear Tejinder,

Thank you for your most kind comments and your time to read the essay. To elaborate on some of the points you mentioned:

Collapse models: I have a basic undertanding of GRW collapse models as well as the one proposed by Penrose. For me, the measurement problem is not so fundamental; it is only fundamental if one assumes quantum information (i.e. the quantum state) has a direct physical manifestation. Whether it does or not is hotly debated and in the essay I do provide a reference to Leifer's review paper on this topic. For me, the more fundamental question is what do the amplitudes themselves physically represent?

Trace Dynamics: I must admit that I am unfamiliar with this theory but it sounds very interesting and novel. Hence I look forward to reading your essay. Thank you for pointing that out.

Cheers,

Del

Thank you for your most kind comments and your time to read the essay. To elaborate on some of the points you mentioned:

Collapse models: I have a basic undertanding of GRW collapse models as well as the one proposed by Penrose. For me, the measurement problem is not so fundamental; it is only fundamental if one assumes quantum information (i.e. the quantum state) has a direct physical manifestation. Whether it does or not is hotly debated and in the essay I do provide a reference to Leifer's review paper on this topic. For me, the more fundamental question is what do the amplitudes themselves physically represent?

Trace Dynamics: I must admit that I am unfamiliar with this theory but it sounds very interesting and novel. Hence I look forward to reading your essay. Thank you for pointing that out.

Cheers,

Del

Dear Del,

A most interesting, dense and deep essay which I enjoyed reading.

I was particularly interested in your conclusion re typical and atypical time intervals. In my theory of time (not covered in my essay) I also have typical intervals (relates to relative time, and flow rate of time) and atypical intervals (relates to expansion of aether, cosmological time - thus working at boyh the smallest and largest scales.

In my essay I discuss the 3 Un's as they have affected me, and I cover another aspect of time from a new point of view - philosophical presentism.

Good luck with the ratings - you deserve high scores!

Regards

lockie Cresswell

report post as inappropriate

A most interesting, dense and deep essay which I enjoyed reading.

I was particularly interested in your conclusion re typical and atypical time intervals. In my theory of time (not covered in my essay) I also have typical intervals (relates to relative time, and flow rate of time) and atypical intervals (relates to expansion of aether, cosmological time - thus working at boyh the smallest and largest scales.

In my essay I discuss the 3 Un's as they have affected me, and I cover another aspect of time from a new point of view - philosophical presentism.

Good luck with the ratings - you deserve high scores!

Regards

lockie Cresswell

report post as inappropriate

Dear Lockie,

Thank you for taking your time to read my essay. I appreciate your kind comments.

Yes in my essay, the typical and atypical time intervals are purely predicted on the notion that compression is perhaps the appropriate mathematical technique for fundamental physics.

Thank you for pointing out your ideas on the intersection of time and typicality. I look forward to reading your essay. (The link above did not work but I have found your essay on https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3397)

Cheers,

Del

Thank you for taking your time to read my essay. I appreciate your kind comments.

Yes in my essay, the typical and atypical time intervals are purely predicted on the notion that compression is perhaps the appropriate mathematical technique for fundamental physics.

Thank you for pointing out your ideas on the intersection of time and typicality. I look forward to reading your essay. (The link above did not work but I have found your essay on https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3397)

Cheers,

Del

Hi Rajan. very important points you raise there on quantum spookiness in a very simple and elegant manner. very well done, you certainly earn my votes.Forgive me, but to be sincere this year's contest raised within me Questions which to date make me more than just suspicious about us as Quantum observers.When quantum event occurs in nature,Do quantum effects of an opposite Nature happen in our brains to counter observation ridding us access to Reality ?maybe you may please see my take on Anthropic bias here -https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3525.all the best to you thanks.

report post as inappropriate

report post as inappropriate

Dear Michael,

Thank you for your kind comment and your time to read the essay.

Your idea on observers is interesting. I find that the standard definition of an observer in quantum theory is not well-defined. Whether the brain will play a part in a future theory is unknown. Of interest to you may be the work of Penrose & Hameroff where they investigate whether quantum superpositions could exist in microtubules.

More pragmatically there has been research on how quantum computing can improve artificial intelligence. There is a paper called "Quantum Machine Learning" by Lloyd et al that covers this area well.

Thank you for pointing me towards your essay.

Cheers,

Del

Thank you for your kind comment and your time to read the essay.

Your idea on observers is interesting. I find that the standard definition of an observer in quantum theory is not well-defined. Whether the brain will play a part in a future theory is unknown. Of interest to you may be the work of Penrose & Hameroff where they investigate whether quantum superpositions could exist in microtubules.

More pragmatically there has been research on how quantum computing can improve artificial intelligence. There is a paper called "Quantum Machine Learning" by Lloyd et al that covers this area well.

Thank you for pointing me towards your essay.

Cheers,

Del

Dear Del,

this was a very exciting essay for me to read---thank you for submitting it to this contest! You provide a highly original perspective, and argue it well. I like the starting point: Einstein and Hilbert, each poised in there respective quest for certainty, set up to be foiled by incompleteness and quantum unpredictability. It's perhaps no accident their names are, together,...

view entire post

this was a very exciting essay for me to read---thank you for submitting it to this contest! You provide a highly original perspective, and argue it well. I like the starting point: Einstein and Hilbert, each poised in there respective quest for certainty, set up to be foiled by incompleteness and quantum unpredictability. It's perhaps no accident their names are, together,...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Dear Jochen,

Thank you for your time to read the essay. I very much appreciate your comments. They were very resourceful.

Firstly your take on General Relativity (GR) with respect to Einstein and Hilbert's aim is beautifully captured. Second your elaboration on the modelling aspect involving probabilities is very well said! I wish I had articulated it that way in the essay!

On a point on GR, I feel that for a conceptual undestanding the light cone as the fundamental structure is the best method. This is mathematically well captured by the null tetrad formulation. However its spin coefficient equations are mathematically "ugly." Hence I feel even with GR, beauty is only skin deep when one puts understanding as the priority.

I have downloaded all your links and I greatly appreciate your time to mention those. I will also read your essay (along with some others) during the weekend.

I am very interested to know more about your ideas on how the goal of finding a comprehensible foundation of quantum physics took you to topics regarding incompleteness. I am looking forward to reading your essay.

Cheers,

Del

Thank you for your time to read the essay. I very much appreciate your comments. They were very resourceful.

Firstly your take on General Relativity (GR) with respect to Einstein and Hilbert's aim is beautifully captured. Second your elaboration on the modelling aspect involving probabilities is very well said! I wish I had articulated it that way in the essay!

On a point on GR, I feel that for a conceptual undestanding the light cone as the fundamental structure is the best method. This is mathematically well captured by the null tetrad formulation. However its spin coefficient equations are mathematically "ugly." Hence I feel even with GR, beauty is only skin deep when one puts understanding as the priority.

I have downloaded all your links and I greatly appreciate your time to mention those. I will also read your essay (along with some others) during the weekend.

I am very interested to know more about your ideas on how the goal of finding a comprehensible foundation of quantum physics took you to topics regarding incompleteness. I am looking forward to reading your essay.

Cheers,

Del

Del:

A new era dawns. Old questions become quaint and historical. Is the whole community ready? Or is physical reality too dangerous for the collective understanding at this time?

report post as inappropriate

A new era dawns. Old questions become quaint and historical. Is the whole community ready? Or is physical reality too dangerous for the collective understanding at this time?

report post as inappropriate

Dear Sherman,

Thank you for your comment.

I agree with you that a new era is dawning in particular in regards to the extraordinary growth of quantum information science: Its novel technologies best articulate the shocking narratives of quantum physics, and the design of those technologies give a much needed resurgence to focusing on the foundational questions.

Cheers,

Del

Thank you for your comment.

I agree with you that a new era is dawning in particular in regards to the extraordinary growth of quantum information science: Its novel technologies best articulate the shocking narratives of quantum physics, and the design of those technologies give a much needed resurgence to focusing on the foundational questions.

Cheers,

Del

I have a comment and a question. The Born rule is tacked onto quantum mechanics and accepted without question. I have often wondered how well it has been tested experimentally. Would we know if there were departures from the Born rule at very high energies (say, cosmic rays), for example?

My question refers to your statement: 'Far more profound are atypical time intervals. These are ones that exhibit Lorentz violations as they cannot be compressed. They do occur but very rarely.' Can you apply your analysis to the famous ambiguity in defining tunnelling time?

report post as inappropriate

My question refers to your statement: 'Far more profound are atypical time intervals. These are ones that exhibit Lorentz violations as they cannot be compressed. They do occur but very rarely.' Can you apply your analysis to the famous ambiguity in defining tunnelling time?

report post as inappropriate

Dear Professor Davies,

I greatly appreciate your time and your comments with questions. To answer accordingly:

Born rule: I do not know whether the Born rule has been tested at this extreme energy environment. However, another curious place would be in the technological development of quantum computers (QC). It would be nice if turns out that the ever increasing entangled set of qubits in a QC ends up fundamentally deviating from the Born rule (ultimately the final stages of the quantum algorithm is a measurement). Certainly in this environment, there will be more people interested with "skin in the game" given the various QC applications (finance, security, etc).

Tunnelling time: Your suggestion is brilliant!!! That would be a very interesting analysis. In fact it may be the exact right place to start looking at how to progress this and develop this into a toy model with some predictive power. I wish I had thought of that! I will spend some time reading the literature in this area and think about this.

Cheers,

Del

I greatly appreciate your time and your comments with questions. To answer accordingly:

Born rule: I do not know whether the Born rule has been tested at this extreme energy environment. However, another curious place would be in the technological development of quantum computers (QC). It would be nice if turns out that the ever increasing entangled set of qubits in a QC ends up fundamentally deviating from the Born rule (ultimately the final stages of the quantum algorithm is a measurement). Certainly in this environment, there will be more people interested with "skin in the game" given the various QC applications (finance, security, etc).

Tunnelling time: Your suggestion is brilliant!!! That would be a very interesting analysis. In fact it may be the exact right place to start looking at how to progress this and develop this into a toy model with some predictive power. I wish I had thought of that! I will spend some time reading the literature in this area and think about this.

Cheers,

Del

Dear Del,

I have wished that all the essays concentrated on the problems that you have addressed about QM. Namely, superposition and Born's rule , because these are really the sticking point.

My system, while not entirely clear, however it point to that the probability density is in fact the density of energy contained in the particle, because as I calculate the associated "lines" and interpret them as energy they very much agree with the standard results of QM and QFT. Moreover also gravity appears and EPR is automatic since the system is inherently nonlocal. All from a system which is so simple and I discovered it by chance and was not after "mathematical beauty".

while I use probability in my programs but that is only for convenience. The system is similar to geometric probability as in line-line and line-circle picking where the results are obtained by probability but it is not the only way.

We seem to disagree on time, however maybe as the theory becomes more mature a different perspective might be in order. Thank you.

Reality is a simple mathematical structure literally, hence computable

report post as inappropriate

I have wished that all the essays concentrated on the problems that you have addressed about QM. Namely, superposition and Born's rule , because these are really the sticking point.

My system, while not entirely clear, however it point to that the probability density is in fact the density of energy contained in the particle, because as I calculate the associated "lines" and interpret them as energy they very much agree with the standard results of QM and QFT. Moreover also gravity appears and EPR is automatic since the system is inherently nonlocal. All from a system which is so simple and I discovered it by chance and was not after "mathematical beauty".

while I use probability in my programs but that is only for convenience. The system is similar to geometric probability as in line-line and line-circle picking where the results are obtained by probability but it is not the only way.

We seem to disagree on time, however maybe as the theory becomes more mature a different perspective might be in order. Thank you.

Reality is a simple mathematical structure literally, hence computable

report post as inappropriate

BTW, my system seem to agree with this interpretation, but not exactly in some details.

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/the-thermal-in

terpretation-of-quantum-physics.967116/

report post as inappropriate

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/the-thermal-in

terpretation-of-quantum-physics.967116/

report post as inappropriate

Hi Del Rajan, I read your essay with great interest. Compression is very interesting as a fundamental concept. I did not understand if the atypical time and the typical time consider them fundamental or emerging. : "time is intrinsic to chance" I hope for your clarifications

Best wishes for your wise

report post as inappropriate

Best wishes for your wise

report post as inappropriate

Hi sorry if I repeat my comment but I noticed errors in my English therefore I tried to write better I read your essay. I found your essay really interesting. Very interesting that the compression of information is taken as a fundamental concept. I have not been able to understand, however, how you consider the atypical and typical time intervals: are they fundamental or emerging? The atypical time interval I think I understand that it is rare and fundamental?Your sentence: "This alludes to the notion that time itself is intrinsically random"Therefore, if randomness is fundamental, time should also be fundamental?

I hope for your clarifications. Thank you in advance and best wishes for your essay!

report post as inappropriate

I hope for your clarifications. Thank you in advance and best wishes for your essay!

report post as inappropriate

Dear Marco,

Sorry about the delayed response. The essay contest closed over a month ago hence I did not check the comments.

Thank you for your time to read the essay.

The essay includes a technical endnotes' section which explains how I arrive at the notion of typical/atypical time intervals. However this is merely a heuristic argument which I emphasized is underdeveloped: I assume that the 'time compression' has the same mathematical backbone as classical compression (quantum compression as articulated in Schumacher's pioneering quantum coding paper also builds largely on the mathematical backbone of classical compression). Analogous to typical and atypical sequences/states, one can then look at typical and atypical time intervals. In the endnotes, this is also extended to the spatial case with some comments made on the Lorentz transformations.

Cheers,

Del

Sorry about the delayed response. The essay contest closed over a month ago hence I did not check the comments.

Thank you for your time to read the essay.

The essay includes a technical endnotes' section which explains how I arrive at the notion of typical/atypical time intervals. However this is merely a heuristic argument which I emphasized is underdeveloped: I assume that the 'time compression' has the same mathematical backbone as classical compression (quantum compression as articulated in Schumacher's pioneering quantum coding paper also builds largely on the mathematical backbone of classical compression). Analogous to typical and atypical sequences/states, one can then look at typical and atypical time intervals. In the endnotes, this is also extended to the spatial case with some comments made on the Lorentz transformations.

Cheers,

Del

Login or create account to post reply or comment.