Quantum Theory can be derived from logic

[Majik1]

I'd like to start here in the Speculation forum. If it withstands scrutiny here, maybe I can move to a more formal forum.

It seems I've been able to derive quantum theory from logic alone. And the wave function turns out to be a mathematical representation of material implication.

There is a way to create a type of path integral using propositions and logical operators. It relies on the fact that a conjunction (logical AND) between propositions implies an implication between those propositions. Every point in space exist in conjunction with every other point. And when each point is represented by a proposition (that at least describes the coordinates of that point), then a path consists of the first point implying the second, in conjunction with, the second point implying the third, in conjunction with, the third implying the forth, etc. Every possible path from start to finish ends up being in disjunction (OR) with all the others.

I found a way to represent entities of logic with mathematical numbers and operators. Implication is represented in set theory with subsets. If a subset is included in a set, then the existence of the set implies the existence of the subset. If the subset in not in the set, then the set does not imply the subset. The Dirac measure then gives a value of 1 if the subset (or element) is included in the set and 0 otherwise. So now there is a way to assign numeric value to implication. Using the Dirac measure in this way, conjunction can be mapped to multiplication, and disjunction is mapped to addition. In this way all those alternative paths get mapped to an infinite number of additions of an infinite number of multiplications to form the path integral of quantum mechanics.

On my website I go through all the details. It's not difficult; advance high school students would probably be able to understand it. It's at:

advertising url removed by moderator

All this may seem like a trick of math. But this framework can be used to justify the set of subatomic particles in the Standard Model as shown at:

advertising url removed by moderator

I'm interested to know if anyone can find a flaw in the reasoning. Thanks.

Edited July 4, 2019 by Phi for All
Don't advertise your website in threads

[Phi for All]

!

Moderator Note

Our rules state that discussions can't rely on leaving the site or watching videos. We also don't allow advertising. Please post what you need to present your idea here.

The rules have changed since you posted this same topic 7 years ago.

 

[Majik1]

Thank you, I forgot I posted here before. However, the website address has changed. Perhaps others would like to know this new address in case they want to look up all the details.

 

 

[Bufofrog]

9 hours ago, Majik1 said:

I'm interested to know if anyone can find a flaw in the reasoning. 

I'm not interested in visiting your site, present your reasoning here.

[Phi for All]

16 hours ago, Majik1 said:

Perhaps others would like to know this new address in case they want to look up all the details.

!

Moderator Note

If you don't post the details they need to discuss your idea here, you'll be breaking the rules you agreed to when you joined, and I'll have to shut the thread down. Perhaps you could just comply with the rules against advertising your website.

 

[Majik1]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

!

Moderator Note

If you don't post the details they need to discuss your idea here, you'll be breaking the rules you agreed to when you joined, and I'll have to shut the thread down. Perhaps you could just comply with the rules against advertising your website.

 

Can I post a file attachement, even it is large?

Is it possible to do Latex? How about mathjax?

Thanks

[Strange]

7 minutes ago, Majik1 said:

Is it possible to do Latex?

Yes. Use [math] tags.

[ math]\Delta \ge \delta[/math] -> [math]\Delta \ge \delta[/math]

(There is a little bug where the Latex isn't rendered until the page is refreshed)

[Majik1]

14 minutes ago, Strange said:

Yes. Use [math] tags.

[ math]\Delta \ge \delta[/math] -> Δ≥δ

(There is a little bug where the Latex isn't rendered until the page is refreshed)

I think I'd prefer an attachment. For then it's just cut and paste and save as pdf. Is that acceptable in this instance?

Edited July 5, 2019 by Majik1

[Strange]

!

Moderator Note

You can provide an attachment to support your argument. But you must make your argument in the thread, not just say "read this document".

 

[Majik1]

5 minutes ago, Strange said:

!

Moderator Note

You can provide an attachment to support your argument. But you must make your argument in the thread, not just say "read this document".

 

We are talking about quantum theory which is a rather difficult subject. It's traditional to provide an abstract and give details in an attached paper. And besides, I don't have an argument yet. That's the whole point in submitting what I have so far, to see if anyone has objections to argue over.

Edited July 5, 2019 by Majik1

[Strange]

2 minutes ago, Majik1 said:

We are talking about quantum theory which is a rather difficult subject. It's traditional to provide an abstract and give details in an attached paper.

This is a discussion forum, not a place to publish your paper. Submit it to a journal, if that is what you want.

Quote

And besides, I don't have an argument yet. 

I was using "argument" in the sense of "a reason or set of reasons given in support of an idea, action or theory".

[Majik1]

3 minutes ago, Strange said:

I was using "argument" in the sense of "a reason or set of reasons given in support of an idea, action or theory".

Yes, I think I did that in my opening post. Give me a few days to cut and paste the website into a Word document and remove the website parts. Then I can save as a pdf and post as an attachment here. Thanks.