Sub-quantum theory

Exploring a Sub-Quantum Perspective: Unveiling the Dynamic Underpinnings of Quantum Phenomena

Introduction: In the realm of quantum mechanics, the profound intricacies of particle behavior have puzzled physicists for decades. As we delve deeper into the mysteries of quantum phenomena, it’s essential to explore alternative perspectives that shed light on the underlying mechanisms driving probabilistic outcomes and statistical behavior. I formulated these random thoughts during my analysis of an alternative and opposing theory by my good friend Nick Colosimo, essentially a theory based on observation-triggered just-in-time computing of a wave function. We still disagree, but we both have the right to be wrong occasionally, and either or both of us could be wrong this time.

I studied quantum theory at university in both the Maths and Physics departments as part of my Applied Maths and Theoretical Physics degree. I am perfectly happy with quantum theory as far as it goes, as a useful suite of mathematics that accurately predicts what we observe by experiment. It isn’t the maths I have ever objected to, it’s the interpretation, and I’m far from alone in that. Maths is a great tool for describing reality, but what reality actually is is a totally different matter.

Over 30 years ago, I used a plastic cup of water to explain the difference between analog and digital computers and why analog would make a strong comeback as we headed into AI. As I explained, every particle in the cup of water was calculating all the forces acting on it, including not only local thermal motion effects and impacts of neighbouring molecules, but the effect of gravity from every other particle in the universe, in real time, whereas a digital supercomputer struggled to model the movement of even a few particles. I had a problem with that though, since it implied infinite processing speed and I don’t really believe that. At least on that point, Nick and I agree.

Current Landscape of Quantum Interpretations: Quantum mechanics has given rise to a variety of interpretations, each attempting to make sense of the fundamental behaviors observed at the quantum level. Concepts like wave-particle duality, superposition, and entanglement challenge our classical intuitions and call for a reevaluation of our understanding of reality.

My proposed “sub-quantum” theory acknowledges existing concepts such as hidden variables theories, emergent behavior, and complex interaction networks. It seeks to outline a cohesive framework that offers a fresh perspective on the quantum world. I also think Einstein might agree at least a bit, based on his famous opposition to the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory “I, at any rate, am convinced that [God] does not throw dice“. What I am proposing is a classical theory that underpins quantum theory. But this is just another everyday blog explaining my own views, which overlaps those of many others, not some great breakthrough

Core Tenets of the Sub-Quantum Theory:

1. Complex Interaction Limits: At the heart of the sub-quantum theory lies the notion that particles exist within an almost infinitely complex web of notional interactions with their surroundings – every particle in a pebble notionally interacts gravitationally and electromagnetically with every other particle in the universe, in real time, an essentially infinite number of interactions and forces varing attosecond by attosecond that affect the pebble in numerous ways. Quantum theory solves this problem by means of interference between waves, wave functions, that interfere and create an observed effect only at the time of ‘observation’. Nick Colosimo’s theory is that the wave function is a fundamental aspect of reality and is computed only on demand only when a conscious observer requires it, based on fundamental limits of computational ability. I disagree with either of these interpretations representing what actually happens, and think of quantum theory and indeed wave functions merely as a convenient mathematical description of the statistics of an underlying reality. In other words, another ‘reality’ underlays quantum theory, a meta-classical theory that can reasonably be termed ‘sub-quantum theory’.
2. Selective Influence: Not all interactions are equal. The sub-quantum theory proposes that only a subset of interactions significantly impact the behavior of individual particles. These selected interactions collectively determine a particle’s trajectory and behavior. Many photons strike our pebble, along with gravitational effects from numerous bodies, motion-derived forces and so on. At any one instant, many of them have no effect, such as the gravity from another particular grain in a pebble in a far away galaxy, or interference effects from another photon travelling millions of kilometres away.
3. Dynamic Variation: Theres is obviously dynamic variation of interaction strength over incredibly short time intervals. A photon passes by, a distant cosmic ray moves a few femtometres and so on. This variation introduces a time-dependent aspect to particle behavior, contributing to the probabilistic nature of quantum phenomena. A photon passing through a slit at one instant is affected by a different set of forces, including interaction with any photons passing through any nearby slits, and behaviour varies as we observe many times, and quantum theory nicely explains those emergent observations as collapse of interfering wave functions. Wave functions are thus merely a useful model, an analog of underlying reality. The quantum maths is correct, the cause is something happening at deeper levels. Quantum mechanics has classical causes.
4. Emergence of Statistical Outcomes: The statistical patterns observed in quantum experiments, such as interference patterns, thus arise as the result of the cumulative effects of these selective interactions. The emergent behavior of particles is a macroscopic manifestation of these microscopic interactions.
5. Threshold of Significance: A particle or photon experience an infinite number of notional forces that vary very rapidly instant to instant. Forces that are too tiny at that instant don’t have any effect, those that are stronger are aggregated and the effect happens. Our pebble is affected by gravity of the Earth, the moon, even incoming waves, and is affected in varying degree by photons close by, but not by interference effects with photons on the other side of the galaxy.
6. This threshold of significance implies that quantum interactions themselves must be quantised. We may eventually discover that quantum theory is in fact recursive.

Divergence from Current Alternatives: While the sub-quantum theory draws inspiration from existing ideas, its novel contributions lie in the emphasis on the dynamic variation of interactions over time. Essentially, only forces above a threshold of significance can have an impact at any time. This perspective differentiates it from traditional interpretations and provides a fresh lens through which to understand the quantum realm.

The Path Forward: The journey of understanding quantum mechanics is an ongoing exploration. Sub-quantum theory is presented not as a definitive solution, but as a hopefully thought-provoking avenue for investigation. It definitely needs work and development to make it into a useful theory, but this blog serves mainly to capture my own current attitudes to quantum theory for more exploration later.