Articles, presentations, and so on
See also my articles about libertarian theory.
The best actual presentations of the current state of research of my theories
- About the lattice model:
- "A Condensed Matter Interpretation of SM Fermions and Gauge Fields", arXiv:0908.0591 published in Found. Phys. vol. 39, 1, p. 73-107 (2009);
- "The Standard Model Fermions as Excitations of an Ether", arXiv:0912.3892;, published in Reimer, A. (ed.), Horizons in World Physics, Volume 278, Nova Science Publishers (2012), arXiv:0912.3892;
- About the theory of gravity:
- "A generalization of the Lorentz ether to gravity with general-relativistic limit", arXiv:gr-qc/0205035, published in Advances in Applied Clifford Algebras 22, 1 (2012), p. 203-242;
- "Black Holes or Frozen Stars? A Viable Theory of Gravity without Black Holes", arXiv:1003.1446, published in Bauer, A.J., Eiffel, D.G. (eds.), Black Holes: Evolution, Theory and Thermodynamics, Nova Science Publishers (2012);
- The article about the interpretation of quantum theory: "The paleoclassical interpretation of quantum theory", arXiv:1103.3506, published in Reimer, A. (ed.), Horizons in World Physics, Volume 284, Nova Science Publishers (2015)
- The beamer presentation I would use if I had to give a talk tomorrow;
The condensed matter interpretation for particle physics
The in my opinion most important paper is that about my ether (condensed matter) model for the standard model of particle physics:
A Condensed Matter Interpretation of SM Fermions and Gauge Fields,
arXiv:0908.0591, published in
Foundations of Physics, vol. 39, nr. 1, p. 73 – 107 (2009),
Some background (referee reports, my comments) of this publication.
General Lorentz ether theory:
The condensed matter interpretation for gravity
Foundations of quantum theory
- Schmelzer, I.: A solution for the Wallstrom problem of Nelsonian stochastics, arXiv:1101.5774v2: solves the most serious problem of Nelsonian stochastics and other quantum interpretations based on flow variables (density ρ(q)=|ψ(q)|2 and velocity v(q)=∇ S(q) = ∇ Im ln ψ(q)) instead of the wave function ψ(q). Wallstrom has objected that in quantum mechanics the integral over a closed path around the zeros of the wave function
∫ vi d qi = ∫ ∂i S(q) d qi = 2 π m
m has to be an integer, but, instead, for the equations in the flow variables m can be an arbitrary real value. So these interpretation do not derive this "quantization condition". In the paper I propose an additional postulate that Δ ρ has to be positive and finite at points where ρ(q)=0. I prove that this gives the necessary quantization property and give also a justification for this postulate.
- Schmelzer, I.: Why the Hamilton operator alone is not enough,
arXiv:0901.3262, published in
Found. Phys. vol.39, p. 486 – 498 (2009), DOI 10.1007/s10701-009-9299-4:
MWI depends on the assumption that decoherence defines uniquely a preferred basis. We prove, using some well-known facts from the theory of the Korteweg - de Vries equation, that there are physically different choices of the preferred basis, related to different decompositions of the universe into systems.
- Schmelzer, I.: Pure quantum interpretations are not viable,
arXiv:0903.4657v3, published in
Found. Phys. vol. 41, 2, p. 159-177 (2011), DOI 10.1007/s10701-010-9484-5: Pure interpretations of quantum theory, which throw away the classical
part of the Copenhagen interpretation without adding new structure to its quantum
part, are not viable. This is a consequence of the non-uniqueness result for the canonical operators obtained in arXiv:0901.3262.
- Schmelzer, I.: A symmetry problem in the Copenhagen interpretation,
arXiv:0909.0175v1: Here I use the non-uniqueness problem to attack the Copenhagen interpretation. While it solves the non-uniqueness problem by their association of the canonical operators with experimental arrangements, this association is necessarily vague. This proves that the vague classical part of the Copenhagen interpretation contains physically important information. But in this case, this vague part is also important for the computation of the symmetry group of the theory. To derive an exact symmetry from a vague theory is impossible in principle, which defines a symmetry problem for the Copenhagen interpretation.
- Schmelzer, I.: Overlaps in pilot wave field theories,
arXiv:0904.0764v3, published in
Found Phys vol. 40: 289 – 300 (2010), DOI 10.1007/s10701-009-9394-6:
The equivalence proof between pilot wave theories and the corresponding quantum theories contains a weak point: One has to show that macroscopically different states do not overlap significantly in the pilot wave variables. It has been questioned that this holds for pilot wave theories with field ontology. We show that the overlap decreases almost exponentially with the number of particles, thus, becomes insignificant for macroscopic particle numbers.
Criticism of "refutations" of Bell's theorem
- Schmelzer, I.: About a "nonlocal" local model considered by L. Vervoort, and the necessity to distinguish locality from Einstein locality, acc. by Foundations of Physics, arXiv:1610.03057. This paper is nice because I succeeded to publish there, as a side issue, the convention to name "Einstein locality" simply "locality":
Moreover, a naming convention which forces us to name theories which are local in any physically important sense "non-local" is not only absurd, but can be even considered as Orwellian. To classify the actual convention as "Orwellian" is justified not only because it requires to name a local theory non-local. It also shares another important aspect with newspeak -- it leaves some incorrect thoughts without words to talk about then: Indeed, the word "local" is the natural word to describe the class of models considered in this paper, with some much higher speed of information transfer in a hidden preferred frame, and to distinguish it from theories with really pathological locality and causality violations. And this is, indeed, a class of theories which is the closest thing to anathema in modern physics.
- Schmelzer, I.: About a "contextuality loophole" in Bell's theorem claimed to exist by Nieuwenhuizen, acc. by Foundations of Physics, DOI 10.1007/s10701-016-0047-2, also arxiv:1610.09642.
- Schmelzer, I.: Comments on a paper by B.Schulz about Bell's inequalities, Ann. Phys. (Berlin), 523, 576-579 (2011), arxiv:0910.4740.