UNIVERSAL REALITY
UNIVERSAL REALITY
A well-established and verified feature of Quantum Mechanics is the startling but inevitable interaction between a quantum event and its observer. Some aspects of the observer-event interaction exemplified by the indeterminate condition of Schrödinger's cat (both dead and alive as long the observer doesn't try to find out which) are fairly well known, and its more obscure (and scientifically precise) ramifications have been thoroughly demonstrated and discussed. Nonetheless, acknowledgement of one consequence of this interdependence more profound than the quantum nature of matter itself is usually evaded on the pretext that the questions it raises have been put to rest by the formulation of the so-called Copenhagen interpretation (of Quantum Mechanics, chiefly the uncertainty principle, wave-particle duality and wavefunction collapse of quantum nature). The reason for sweeping any doubts of its validity under the scientific carpet whenever a serious discussion of this interdependence looms, stems from its denial of the possibility for complete objectivity in scientific inquiry. If taken to its logical conclusion observer-event interaction would not just undermine the interpretation which rationalized it but affect the very basis of scientific inquiry (alternative interpretations thus far have not adequately addressed this issue either).
Quantum theory showed that the most hallowed principle of classical science, that of the independence of the observer from 'objective reality' of which Albert Einstein's Relativity was the ultimate culmination was in principle disallowed in the realm of quanta. Physicists split into two camps with on the one side the realists who maintained objectivity (at least on their more familiar terrain of macroscopic scales) and argued that inner consistency of Quantum Mechanics did not prove it to be complete- thus leaving room for progress toward a resolution of the enigma of subjective interaction. On the other side were the 'positivists' who (claiming that the cause for the interdependence was inaccessible in principle) argued that while objective reality is not independent of the observer it is at least identical for all observers, thereby upholding another pillar of science: that of the repeatability of experiments.
The real quandary and enigma of Quantum Mechanics is that the acceptance of (subjective) observer-event interaction is incompatible with the assertion that reality is the same for all observers: to an observer other observers are simply synonymous with other events. Accordingly, we are forced to conclude that ultimately reality is universally and thus inevitably subjective- not just for all practical purposes of the human condition but in principle. It may now be appreciated why scientists have affected its resolution, Quantum Mechanics did not just prove that there exist aspects to reality to which it has no access (contrary to some assertions it has not proven that these are necessarily hidden from science) but that the scientific method itself is fundamentally limited and ultimately is incapable of accounting for all of reality (the method, not science is the limitation). Subjectivity not only puts a limit on the validity of the repeatability of experiments, but also introduces a certain self-fulfilling element in any experiment. In other words while it may lead us to ever more complex descriptions of reality, the scientific method itself cannot bring us to the goal of achieving a complete account of reality and, hence, some advances in our understanding of nature can only be achieved through a process that (temporarily) suspends its discipline.
This outcome uncannily resembles that of Kurt Gödel's incompleteness theorems of mathematics, yet it is more profound since it pertains to all of science and the way we perceive ourselves. A more direct parallel of this quandary is with Zeno's paradox (in the paradox the protagonist ponders that at the halfway point to its goal it will still only be progressing to the halfway point of the then remaining distance etc. and so while ever getting closer never will reach its goal). What resolves Zeno's paradox such that it will let the protagonist go from A to Z, is to side-step its terms of reference and proceed in discrete steps: A, B, C etc. What this means for the goal of unifying science's two incompatible accounts of reality is that the scientific method itself is the barrier through which we must break. As Zeno's 'classical' approach needed replacement by a quantum method, so the impasse left by the Copenhagen interpretation will require an input external to what is accessible by the scientific method- a quantum leap to the paradigm that bridges Quantum Mechanics to classical science.
The unification of the space-time geometry of Relativity and the quantum world of Quantum Mechanics presented in this discourse did not arise as a consequence of the new concepts that I have added to mathematics and physics. Rather the fulfillment of this goal is the result of working with a complete model from which prevailing misconceptions could be identified and deconstructed. This approach made it possible to envision then rationalize which parts if missing would result in the extant state of science- not unlike cutting puzzle pieces from the picture on the box cover such that they match the partially assembled fragments of the puzzle on the table.