1: \section*{Abstract}

2: 

3: A new ontological view of the quantum measurement processes is given, 

4: which has bearings on many broader issues in the foundations of 

5: quantum mechanics as well.  In this scenario a quantum measurement is 

6: a non-equilibrium phase transition in a ``resonant cavity'' formed 

7: by the entire physical universe including all of its material and 

8: energy content.  A quantum measurement involves the energy and matter 

9: exchange among not only the system being measured and the measuring 

10: apparatus but also the global environment of the universe resonant

11: cavity, which together constrain the nature of the phase transition.

12:                                                                                 

13: Strict realism, including strict energy and angular momentum conservation, 

14: is recovered in this view of the quantum measurement process beyond 

15: the limit set by the uncertainty relations, which are themselves derived 

16: from the exact commutation relations for quantum conjugate variables.  

17: Both the amplitude and the phase of the quantum mechanical wavefunction 

18: acquire substantial meanings in the new ontology, and the probabilistic 

19: element is removed from the foundations of quantum mechanics, its apparent

20: presence in the quantum measurement being solely a result of the

21: sensitive dependence on initial/boundary conditions of the phase

22: transitions of a many degree-of-freedom system which is effectively

23: the whole universe.  Vacuum fluctuations are viewed as

24: the ``left over'' fluctuations after forming the whole numbers of

25: nonequilibrium resonant modes in the universe cavity.

26:                                                                                 

27: This new view on the quantum processes helps to clarify many

28: puzzles in the foundations of quantum mechanics, such as wave-particle

29: duality, Schrodinger's Cat paradox, first and higher order coherence

30: of photons and atoms, virtual particles, the existence of commutation 

31: relations and quantized behavior, etc.  It naturally explains also the

32: appearance of a hierarchy of structures in the physical universe

33: as the result of successive spontaneous phase transitions under 

34: natural boundary conditions, whose occurrence does not need the 

35: presence of conscious observers to ``collapse the wavefunction''.  

36: Implications of the new view on the currently successful approaches in 

37: quantum field theories, such as the renormalization procedure

38: and Feynman diagrammatic approach, are also discussed.

39:                                                                                 

40: \section{Introduction}

41: 

42: The advent of quantum mechanics eight decades ago and the accompanying 

43: Copenhagen interpretation marked the beginning of a new phase of physics 

44: research in the microscopic domain, whereupon ontological realism was generally 

45: abandoned for computational proficiency.  Despite the successful demonstration 

46: of statistical correspondence between quantum theory and experiments

47: (Wheeler \& Zurek eds. 1983 and the references therein), as well as the 

48: even more spectacular demonstration of the quantitative agreement 

49: between the renormalized quantum electrodynamics calculations 

50: and experimental results on fundamental quantities such as Lamb shift 

51: and the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron (see, e.g.,

52: Nambu 1949 and the references therein), a cloud of unease 

53: lingers over the loss of a concrete and realistic image of the physical 

54: world, compared to that of the classical world which we were used to.

55:  

56: Central to this unease is the quantum measurement problem 

57: and the associated probabilistic interpretation of the quantum mechanical

58: wavefunction which predicts in the statistical sense the outcome of

59: any quantum measurement.  As eloquently summarized in a 

60: recent article by DeWiit (2005): ``If one accepts the view that 

61: formalism and reality are isomorphic, then in the quantum theory 

62: one is obliged to accept a stupendous number of simultaneous realities, 

63: namely, all the possible outcomes of quantum measurements as well as 

64: all the possible `classical' worlds that emerge spontaneously from the 

65: wavefunction of the universe through the phenomenon of decoherence''.

66: Even without being a whole-hearted convert to the above

67: many-world view, one is still left wondering about

68: the underlying implications of the probability interpretation.

69: 

70: As is well-known in the classical world, the statistical and 

71: probabilistic phenomenology of a physical process does not 

72: necessarily imply an underlying propabilistic ontology.

73: Likewise, the propabilistic outcome of the quantum measurement 

74: does not necessarily warrant a ``many world'' ontology, especially 

75: if this implies giving up energy conservation which is one of the 

76: cornerstones of the physical sciences.

77: 

78: The unease results also from the need to artificially draw a line between

79: the behaviors of the quantum and the classical world.  Since

80: in the physical universe the large and the small scale phenomena

81: are often intermingled, and even in quantum measurement of microscopic 

82: processes the apparatus involved are of macroscopic dimensions, 

83: this lack of a clear dividing line between the two worlds 

84: necessarily leads to paradoxes such as ``Schrodinger's Cat

85: paradox'' (Schrodinger 1935), and the seemingly ridiculous 

86: need for a conscious observer to ``collapse the wavefunction'' 

87: in order for the measurement result to settle onto one of 

88: the many possibilities dictated by quantum calculations

89: (Von Neumann 1932).

90: 

91: Part of the goals of the current paper is to restore realism 

92: to the ontological foundations of quantum mechanics, and to bridge 

93: the connection between the quantum and the classical worlds.  

94: This work goes beyond the orthodox Copenhagen Interpretation,

95: and discredits the uncertainty relation as a fundamental law

96: of physics, and shows rather that the commutation relations,

97: from which the uncertainty relations can be derived, describe

98: quantitatively the behavior of the quantized resonant modes in

99: the universe cavity.  In the new ontology the concepts of 

100: nonequilibrium phase transition as well as the generalized 

101: Mach's principle underlie the explanation of  all quantized phenomena.  

102: A coherent picture can be arrived at which synthesizes also the

103: results from the past decades on S-matrix theories, 

104: quantum electrodynamics and gauge field theories, and offers

105: a clearer explanation of phenomena both in the quantum

106: as well as in the classical world. 

107: 

108: The organization of the paper is as follows: Section 2

109: outlines the essential features of the quantum measurement

110: process, and ascertain that the so-called ``quantum wavefunction 

111: collapse'' is real and is prevalent in quantum measurements.

112: It also review several of the previously proposed theories on 

113: quantum measurement. 

114: Section 3, which forms the core of this paper, presents the new 

115: ontological view of the quantum measurement process, gives its 

116: motivation and main assumptions, as well as the

117: implications of the new ontology on resolving and coherently

118: interpreting many issues in the foundations and frontiers

119: of quantum mechanics.  The remaining unanswered

120: questions which come into sharper focus under this new picture will

121: also be outlined. Finally, section 4 summarizes the

122: conclusions of this work.

123: 

124: \section{The Quantum Measurement Problem}

125: 

126: \subsection{Distinguishing Features of Quantum Wavefunction Collapse}

127: 

128: Whereas a classical measurement usually leads to

129: a definitive result given by deterministic classical calculations,

130: the result of a quantum measurement in general can only be predicted 

131: in a probabilistic sense.  The quantum mechanical wavefunction is 

132: the most quantitative result from a quantum calculation, and

133: one can hope for a definitive answer only if the measurement is

134: towards an eigenvalue of a system already settled onto its

135: corresponding eigenstate.  If this is not so, the underlying

136: system is assumed to subsequently ``collapse'' onto an eigenstate 

137: of the measurement operator with the probability for the choice of

138: state given by the absolute square of the wavefunction.

139: 

140: First of all, we must convince ourselves that there is sufficient

141: evidence to indicate that such ``wavefunction collapse'' does

142: happen during quantum measurement, and that a quantum system

143: under measurement behaves in essentially different ways from

144: classical systems.

145: 

146: Most of us are familiar with the position-momentum uncertainty

147: relation. The quantum mechanical wavefunction of a particle

148: in momentum eigenstate $\bf{p_0}$ is expressed as the following

149: plane wave 

150: \begin{equation}

151: u_{{\bf{p_0}}} ({\bf{r}})= {1 \over {\sqrt {(2 \pi \hbar)^3} }} 

152: \exp^{{ i \over \hbar}

153: {\bf{p_0}} \cdot {\bf{r}}} 

154: ,

155: \label{eq:1}

156: \end{equation}

157: so a momentum measurement will lead to a definite result $\bf{p_0}$.  However,

158: if this momentum measurement is followed by a positional measurement,

159: the resulting position can take any value with equal probability, as indicated

160: by the constant amplitude of (\ref{eq:1}) with respect to the values of

161: $\bf{r}$. But once the position measurement is performed and obtained a 

162: specific value $\bf{r_0}$, the wavefunction ``jumps'' to the new form of

163: \begin{equation}

164: u_{\bf{r_0}} (\bf{r})= \delta (\bf{r} - \bf{r_0})

165: ,

166: \end{equation}

167: the subsequent momentum

168: measurement once again becomes uncertain, and every value of the momentum

169: is equally likely to be obtained.  The ``particle'' thus

170: alternates between possessing a position-eigenstate wavefunction and

171: a momentum-eigenstate wavefunction while undergoing alternating position 

172: and momentum measurements.

173: 

174: Other evidence of the wavefunction collapse are found in the experiments

175: described in Chiao et al. (1994 and the references therein) using photons,

176: and Berman ed. (1997 and the references therein) using atoms.

177: In such experiments the photons and atoms are spread out, i.e., 

178: in mostly momentum eigenstate, just prior to

179: detection, and are localized at the instant of detection.  This feature

180: is confirmed in many of the ``delayed choice'' type of experiments 

181: (Wheeler 1978; Alley et al. 1987; Hellmuth et al. 1987; Briegel et a. 1997). 

182: 

183: Other examples which display the distinctive characteristics of the

184: quantum measurement process include the Aspect et al. experiment 

185: (Aspect 1976; Aspect, Grangier \& Roger 1981)

186: to test Bell's inequality (Bell 1965) and quantum entanglement, which

187: revealed the existence of the action-at-a-distance type of nonlocal 

188: communication during the quantum measurement process.

189: Special relativity and Lorentz invariance appear to be violated

190: in both the entanglement type experiments and in the broader

191: quantum measurements which involve an instantaneous wavefunction

192: collapse.

193: 

194: Another characteristic feature of the wavefunction collapse 

195: is that energy appears not to be conserved, at least not among the 

196: measuring apparatus and the system being measured.  For example,

197: the detection of the position of a particle makes its momentum,

198: and thus energy, uncertain.  Since this uncertain energy

199: could in principle be infinite, the question comes as to where

200: the additional energy has arrived from.  Even for resonant interaction,

201: it was known that ``...  transitions within short times 

202: occur not only between states which satisfy the condition 

203: $E + \epsilon = E' + \epsilon'$

204: ($E$ and $E'$ being the energy of the system before and after the

205: transition, $\epsilon$ and $\epsilon'$ that of the apparatus).

206: These states are given preference by resonance only after

207: a long time.  In practice, after a time $\Delta t$, only transitions

208: by which $|E + \epsilon - E' - \epsilon'| <= h_{bar} / \Delta t$ are 

209: of importance (Landau and Peierls 1931)''.

210: The apparent energy non-conservation is also present in processes

211: involving virtual particles.

212: 

213: \subsection{Existing Quantum Measurement Theories}

214: 

215: The many aspects of the quantum measurement processes and the various

216: versions of quantum measurement theories can be found in several books and

217: references on the subject.  See, e.g., Wheeler \& Zurek (1983),

218: Braginsky \& Khalili (1992), Namiki, Pascazio, \& Nakazato (1997)

219: and the references therein.

220: 

221: \subsubsection{The Copenhagen Interpretation}

222: 

223: The orthodox Copenhagen Interpretation (see, e.g. Bohr 1928) for quantum

224: processes emerged at the wake of Born's propabilistic interpretation 

225: of the quantum mechanical wavefunction (Born 1926)

226: and Heisenberg's uncertainty principle (Heisenberg 1927), 

227: and incorporates also Bohr's own Principle of Complementarity.  

228: It emphasizes the need for classical description of quantum measurement 

229: results, but requires a clear (but somewhat arbitrary)

230: distinction between the quantumness of the system 

231: being measured, and the classicality of the measuring instrument.

232: It introduces formally the element of ``wavefunction collapse'' into

233: the description of quantum measurement, but gives no explanation of

234: the nature or cause of the collapse.  Neither does it allow any

235: substantial interpretation of the wavefunction itself.  It is at best only

236: a compromise for the lack of a true ontological theory.  Its success lies 

237: solely in the phenomenological description of the quantum world and 

238: in predicting the quantum measurement results in a probabilistic sense.  

239: The Copenhagen Interpretation started the trend of ``shut-up and calculate'' 

240: practice which still dominates the scene of quantum research 

241: eight decades after its invention.

242: 

243: \subsubsection{``Many World'' Interpretation}

244: 

245: The ``many world'' theory of Everett III (1957) and DeWitt (1970)

246: did away with the quantum jumps of the standard Copenhagen picture, 

247: and proposes instead that the quantum world is governed only by the 

248: linear and continuous evolution of Schrodinger type.  The many possibilities

249: of reality offered by the Schrodinger's equation are all realized,

250: and they branch away from one another at every instant.  We are only

251: aware of one of the possibilities because we reside only on one of

252: the branches. 

253: 

254: This theory itself obviously is not falsifiable, and does not constitute

255: a bona fide scientific theory in the sense of Popper (1935).  It also 

256: conflicts with the realist tradition, and does not offer an explanation of 

257: where the energy of all the ``branching aways'' comes from.  Neither does it

258: help understanding quantum features such as the wave-particle duality

259: in a double-slit type of experiment.

260: 

261: \subsubsection{``Decoherence'' Theories}

262: 

263: The modern decoherence theories (Wigner 1963; Zurek 2002 and the references 

264: therein) originated from J. Von Neumann's quantum measurement theory 

265: (Von Neumann 1932).  A common theme in these theories is that the measurement 

266: process is viewed as a multi-step process, with the initial interaction

267: of the system being measured and the measuring apparatus 

268: bringing about a correlation between the two, and their states

269: becoming entangled. Subsequently, the density matrix

270: describing such a entangled pure state loses its off-diagonal

271: elements (either spontaneously as in the case of von Newmann's version,

272: or through interaction with the environment as in the Zurek's

273: version), a process which is termed ``decoherence'' or ``reduction

274: of wavefunction'', and the density matrix of the measurement process

275: thus becomes that of a mixture state instead of a pure state.

276: Following this step, one usually has to resort to the intervention

277: of conscious observers to finally pick from one of the many classical

278: probabilities indicated by the nonvanishing diagonal elements

279: of the ``decohered'' density matrix.

280: 

281: The decoherence theory gives no true cause of the

282: loss of the off-diagonal elements (coupling with a thermal dissipative

283: environment does not describe the nature of all quantum measurement processes,

284: not even the most classical ones such as successive position/momentum

285: measurements).  The further need for conscious observers to intervene

286: to decide on one of the classical possibilities is also in conflict

287: with what we observe in the natural world where processes happen

288: without the intervention of human intelligence.

289: There is also no explanation in this picture of what

290: the rest of the potential classical outcomes mean and what happen

291: to them when a conscious being picks out one among the many.

292: 

293: As we will see below, in the quantum to classical transition, the real 

294: issue is not the vanishing of the off-diagonal interference term in

295: the density matrix (i.e.  the so-called decoherence), but rather the 

296: discontinuous evolution of the wavefunction at the moment of measurement, 

297: described as a non-equilibrium phase transition.

298: 

299: \section{The New Ontology}

300: 

301: In the classical world, all quantized phenomena we know 

302: of are related to resonances in a particular type of cavity, either

303: closed (as in the equilibrium resonance phenomena) or open (as in the 

304: nonequilibrium resonance phenomena). In particular, the 

305: nonequilibrium resonance phenomena 

306: are closely related to the nonequilibrium phase transitions, and the 

307: structures so formed in the underlying open, far-from-equilibrium systems

308: are termed ``dissipative structures'' (Glansdorf \& Prigogine 1971; 

309: Nicolis \& Prigogine 1977).  Some classical examples of dissipative

310: structures are the turbulent convection cells in atmosphere circulation 

311: (Benard's instability, see, e.g. Koschmieder 1993 and the

312: references therein), and the spiral structure in galaxies 

313: (Zhang 1996,1998,1999,2003,2004).  A close analogy

314: to such a nonequilibrium phase transition is the three-dimensional stereo

315: image formation by the human eyes and brain when observing two

316: separate stereo images: The formation of the three-dimensional

317: image in the brain is obviously not

318: a simple linear and sequential optical interaction, but rather 

319: pattern formation through spontaneous symmetry breaking.  Once formed,

320: the new pattern is stable against small perturbations.  

321: Dissipative structures are in dynamical equilibrium - their maintenance

322: depends on a constant flux of energy and entropy through the system,

323: and the exchange with their environment.

324: 

325: The universe is an open and evolving system.  If we insist on a

326: realist interpretation of the physical processes,

327: as well as on a continuous classical and quantum interface,

328: we have to seek the origin of the quantized behavior

329: in resonance phenomena.  Since physical constants

330: such as Planck's constant are universal, and different types

331: of interaction processes in vastly different environments

332: give the same elementary particle properties, such resonant behavior

333: are expected to originate from the entire matter and energy content

334: of the universe.  Such a view is closely related to Mach's principle

335: for explaining the origin of mass and inertia (see, e.g.,

336: Barbour \& Pfister 1995 and the references therein),

337: and forms the starting point of the new ontological view of

338: quantum mechanics we are presenting in this paper.

339: 

340: In what follows in this section, we will first list the

341: central postulates of this ontology, and then provide

342: further justifications through the comparison with empirical

343: evidence, the work of the past few decades in quantum

344: field theories, and some earlier speculations of the pioneering

345: workers.

346: 

347: \subsection{Fundamental Postulates}

348: 

349: \begin{itemize}

350: \item It is assumed that a generalized form of ``Mach's Principle''

351: governs the operation of the physical universe, and that the local

352: properties of matter, including the values of fundamental constants

353: and the forms of physical laws, are determined by the global distribution

354: of all the matter and energy content in the universe.

355: \item The physical universe is organized into hierarchies (as reflected

356: in part in the spontaneous breaking of gauge symmetry in the generation 

357: of physical laws).  The quantum/classical hierarchy is divided

358: through spontaneous nonequilibrium phase transitions which form the

359: macroscopic structures.  These macroscopic structures are

360: capable of resisting the diffusion/smearing tendency of

361: pure quantum states governed by Schrodinger-type wave equations

362: and can thus remain quasi-stable.

363: \item The quantized nature of fundamental processes originates

364: from nonequilibrium phase transitions in the universe 

365: resonant cavity.  The usual quantization procedure by enforcing

366: the commutation relations is equivalent to establishing modal

367: closure relations in the universe cavity.  Uncertainty relations 

368: are only the phenomenological derivatives of

369: the corresponding commutation relations and they themselves

370: have no independent fundamental significance.

371: \item A quantum measurement process is equivalent to

372: setting up an appropriate boundary condition so that

373: a phase transition in the joint system of object, measuring 

374: instrument and the rest of the universe is induced.

375: \item The quantum mechanical wavefunction describes the substantial

376: distribution of the underlying matter of specific modal type.

377: Its absolute square gives the probability for obtaining a particular

378: configuration in the measurement phase transition,

379: and its phase encodes the influence of the environment

380: which determines its subsequent evolution.  The probabilistic element 

381: is thus removed from the ontology of quantum mechanics.

382: \item The evolution of physical systems in the universe is 

383: described by successive stages of continuous wavefunction evolution

384: and discontinuous phase transitions.  The universe as a whole is

385: neither described by a single autonomous wavefunction, nor is it

386: a statistical mixture.  It is organized rather as a hierarchy of

387: nearly independently-evolving subsystems, with the division of

388: the hierarchies accomplished by successive stages of phase transitions,

389: though the interaction and exchanges among the hierarchies also

390: happen during the same phase transitions.

391: \item In this picture the vacuum fluctuations are the ``residuals''

392: of the making of the ``whole'' numbers of non-equilibrium

393: quasi-stationary modes in the open, nonequilibrium universe cavity.

394: \end{itemize}

395: 

396: \subsection{Implications on the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics}

397: 

398: The new ontology has immediate implications for obtaining a coherent

399: picture of the observed quantum phenomena and for bridging the connection

400: with the classical world.  The effectiveness of these interpretations 

401: also serves as empirical support for the validity of our fundamental postulates.

402: 

403: \subsubsection{The Meaning of the Quantum Mechanical Wavefunction} 

404: 

405: When Schrodinger first derived his wave mechanics formulation,

406: he envisioned the wavefunction as representing the electron density,

407: and a point electron as a superpositional wave packet (Schrodinger 1926a).  

408: This view was criticized (notably by Lorentz, see, e.g. Moore

409: 1989, p. 216) and Schrodinger himself 

410: subsequently abandoned it.  There are mainly two problems with this view.

411: First of all, a wavepacket initially localized in space

412: is found to disperse with time when the time-dependent Schrodinger

413: equation is solved, especially if the size of the wavepacket is

414: not much larger than the de Broglie wavelength. Secondly,

415: as Schrodinger has commented: ``The $\Psi$ function itself cannot and may not be

416: interpreted directly in terms of three-dimensional space -- however

417: much the one electron problem tends to mislead us on this point --

418: because it is in general a function in (3n-dimensional) configuration

419: space, not real space'' (Schrodinger 1926).  

420: 

421: The commonly accepted interpretation of the wavefunction in the 

422: nonrelativistic quantum mechanics is the probabilistic interpretation 

423: first suggested by Max Born (1926).    Quantum mechanics yields 

424: only probabilities for the outcomes of atomic events, but the 

425: probabilities themselves evolve in a precise, deterministic fashion in 

426: accordance with the Schrodinger equation.  The wavefunction is thus

427: stripped of any substantial meaning and is considered only as

428: a probability wave.   In quantum field theories, 

429: however, a certain realist element can be discerned within the overall 

430: probabilistic framework.  This is because quantum field theories 

431: already incorporated many of the modal features implicitly.  

432: 

433: In our current ontology, the realist view of the wavefunction is fully

434: recovered.  The probability wave is now a physical entity, the chance

435: factor only enters later, at the moment of measurement.

436: The fact that the wavefunction exists in the 3n-dimensional

437: configuration space no longer poses a problem, since this signifies only

438: the interchange and interrelation of the different parcels of the

439: modal content among a multi-particle state.  

440: Thus, the coordinates of choice for the multi-particle

441: wavefunction could be any of the abstract canonical coordinates of Hamilton's

442: mechanics, since these can equally effectively express modal

443: characteristics.  Furthermore, the dispersion of the

444: wavepacket is a natural feature of the superpositional state for a localized

445: ``particle''.  Schrodinger's earlier confusion lies in regarding

446: the localized particle as a pure resonant state, and he struggled with

447: preserving the localization of the wavepacket.  In actuality the momentum

448: eigenstate, which is spread out in space, is often a more ``natural'' state

449: for a particle resonance, as we will comment further below,

450: thus an isolated positional state tends to diffuse towards it.

451: 

452: The probability factor in the result of quantum measurement is due

453: to the intrinsic sensitive dependence on initial/boundary conditions

454: of the phase transitions happening in a many degree-of-freedom system.

455: Just as its classical counterpart, the underlying cause of this

456: probability factor is deterministic though generally not ``determinable'' 

457: due to the difficulty of tracking down all the causes in an effective 

458: infinite degree-of-freedom system which contain the evolving wavefunctions 

459: and quasi-steady states of all the matter in the universe.

460: 

461: Whereas the amplitude of the wavefunction is correlated with the modal 

462: density in the configuration space, and can thus lead to the probability of a 

463: particular measurement outcome as in the Born's interpretation, 

464: the phase of the wavefunction is related to the interaction fields 

465: in the gauge field formulation. As C.N Yang puts it, ``all fundamental

466: forces are phase fields (Yang 1987)''.

467: 

468: The Aharonov-Bohm effect (Aharonov \& Bohm 1959) which shows the influence to

469: the phase in the region where the nominal field strength is absent demonstrate

470: that it is the relative change in the phase of the wavefunction of the 

471: electrons produced by the potential that is physically observable.

472: The change is not produced by any local interaction of the

473: potential with the electrons.  Rather, it is dictated by a certain

474: global property of the potential specified by a gauge function. 

475: 

476: In the new ontology the quantum mechanical wavefunction reflects the 

477: self-organization of the matter contents in the universe into modal form. 

478: The wavefunction of a quantum observable usually spreads throughout 

479: in the infinite space, and the interaction between the different 

480: observables/modes are global in general, which is the reason that 

481: quantum mechanics is formulated in the Hilbert space, a natural domain

482: to describe abstract global modal relations.  

483: A quantum wavefunction continuously evolves and can be superposed

484: as in the interference effect.  Measurement phase transition introduces 

485: nonlinearity and makes the linear interference effect permanent.

486: 

487: \subsubsection{Schrodinger, Heisenberg, and Dirac's Formulation

488: of Non-Relativistic Quantum Mechanics.  Nature of the Stationary States}

489: 

490: Schrodinger's wave equation describes the continuous evolution for 

491: a system not already on one of the energy stationary states.

492: Heisenberg's matrix treatment, on the other hand, deals directly with 

493: transition probabilities between the discreet stationary states.

494: The two approaches are complementary, and their formal equivalence

495: can be demonstrated (Schrodinger 1926b) especially through

496: the transformation theory developed by Dirac (1926,1927,1958).

497: 

498: However, one can demonstrate that something is missing from these

499: formulations through a simple example, that of

500: the trace of a single particle in a Wilson cloud chamber (Mott 1929). 

501: Since Schrodinger's picture predicts the dispersion of the particle

502: wavepacket during propagation, and Heisenberg's picture describes

503: the discontinuous jumps between stationary state, neither

504: can account for the continuous and yet sharply-defined trace

505: of a particle in the cloud chamber.  In the new ontology, however,

506: this continuous and thin trace is interpreted as produced by

507: a series of environmentally induced phase transitions -- i.e. the

508: interaction of the particle wavepacket with the cloud chamber

509: gaseous background.  The thin trace is a dynamical balance of the dispersion

510: tendency of the single particle wavepacket during propagation,

511: and the wavefunction collapse tendency onto the successive positional

512: eigenstates.

513: 

514: A quantum operator in general probes global instead of local 

515: characteristics.  The operators that commute have the same eigenfunction set.

516: The eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of operators are related through:

517: \begin{equation}

518: A \Psi_{A,n} = a_n \Psi_{A, n}

519: \end{equation}

520: The underlying meaning of this operation in the new ontology is that 

521: certain operators preserve the modal structure of the corresponding

522: modes. If an operator operates on a state that is not one of its

523: eigenstates, it induces a phase transition and causes the original state

524: to collapse onto one of its eigenstates.

525: 

526: It is interesting to note that even though the eigenvalue of a

527: stationary state is a constant (call it $\alpha$, the eigenfunction 

528: is in general

529: time dependent (the particular form of the eigenfunction, if it

530: is a simultaneous eigenstate of the Hamiltonian as well, is

531: $|\alpha > \exp ({{-iE_{\alpha} t} \over \hbar})$ (see, e.g., Sakurai 1985).

532: Therefore quantum mechanical stationary state is a kind of dynamical

533: equilibrium in constant evolution, consistent with the nonequilibrium

534: stationary state picture (Zhang 1998) we have proposed.

535: 

536: In practice, apart from stationary states and freely-evolving 

537: wavefunctions, the density matrix formalism (Von Neumann 1927)

538: has also been employed to describe quantum systems that are

539: thought to be statistical mixtures or ensembles.  Since

540: we adopt a realist ontology, no physical systems will actually

541: be in a statistical mixture state.  The physical universe is

542: described as a series of hierarchies defined by successive

543: phase transitions, which form quasi-stationary structures.

544: The apparent success of the density matrix approach is understood as the 

545: intrinsic harmonic nature of the evolution of the parts and parcels of

546: these quasi-stationary states, and the effect of time average 

547: in this case mimics the effect of ensemble average.

548: 

549: \subsubsection{Extent of a Quantum Measurement Process}

550: 

551: A quantum measurement is in general a non-local process, and in the 

552: new ontology its result is not determined soly by the localized measuring 

553: instrument and the object being measured, as manifested by the probabilistic 

554: nature of the measurement results.  Quantum measurements also involve

555: the ``give and take'' with the rest of the universe, as evidenced

556: in the previously-mentioned position/momentum pair of measurements.

557: This ``give and take'' with the rest of the universe accounts for the apparent

558: violation of energy conservation in many quantum measurement processes.

559: It also provides a natural explanation to the paradoxical fact that the 

560: accelerated electrons radiate in certain cases (as when they travel freely

561: in straight lines) and not in other cases (as when they are in the Bohr

562: atoms).

563: 

564: A pure quantum mechanical resonance remains a modal resonance 

565: spreading out in space until the moment

566: of detection.  Detection shows quantum behavior because the 

567: ``remainder'' of the stuff in the universe cavity shows quantum behavior.  

568: Therefore during the emission or detection of a ``particle''

569: there has to be a ``give and take'' with the background field

570: (or the rest of the universe) to make up the difference. 

571: The detected particle is no longer the same particle 

572: during propagation because of the exchange with the universal background.

573: 

574: The strongest support for the involvement of the universe resonant

575: cavity during the quantum measurement process is actually the constancy

576: of the elementary particle characteristics among many different

577: physical processes.  Without a global resonant cavity to determine

578: the modal characteristics, we would not have such things as elementary

579: particles or for that matter fundamental constants themselves.

580: The identity of particles is the result of their being the same mode.

581: Other examples of the extended nature of quantum interactions

582: are phonons and plasmon-mediated processes in solid state physics.

583: 

584: The global nature of the interaction/phase transition is also reflected in

585: the ``photon scattering'' experiment of the atom interferometer (Schmiedmayer

586: et al. 1997). During those single photon scattering events

587: the phase imprints on the two arms of the atom interferometer

588: reflected the phase difference

589: of the photon wavefunction where it intersects the two arms of the

590: interferometer, even though scattering of a single photon off a single

591: atom wave is supposedly a single event.  This is no longer so if the two

592: arm's separation is large enough -- in that case the lost coherence

593: will not be able to be recovered.

594: 

595: \subsubsection{Wave-Particle Duality}

596: 

597: The wave-particle duality is one of the puzzling characteristics

598: of the quantum world, which contrasts sharply to the behaviors 

599: we are used to in the classical world.  The wave-particle duality 

600: is partly what Bohr based his Complementarity Principle upon (Bohr 1928).  

601: Modern quantum optical experiments show that a free-propagating beam 

602: of photons show simultaneously the wave and the particle characteristics

603: (Aichele et al. 2004).

604: 

605: The wave-particle duality is manifest most clearly in the de Broglie 

606: relation ($p = h/\lambda$) and Planck relation ($E=h \nu$), 

607: each on one side indicates a pure wave characteristic ($\nu$ and $\lambda$)

608: and on the other a pure particle characteristic ($E$ and $p$).

609: The seeming contradictory characteristic is easily clarified in the

610: new ontology.  Here a particle is more of a pure resonance

611: when it is a wave mode and is spread out.  When it is a localized particle,

612: it is in a mixed resonant state, or the superposition of pure states.

613: 

614: In fact, in the quantum field theories, only the fields are localized,

615: but field quanta are spatially extended.  These spatially distributed

616: field quanta arrive from the first approximation of the solution

617: of field equations in the non-interacting limit, which simplifies

618: analysis and is the source of the name ``particle''.

619: 

620: \subsubsection{Uncertainty Principle, Quantum Commutation Relation,

621: and Classical Poisson Bracket}

622: 

623: Heisenberg (1926) wrote in a letter to Pauli explaining the

624: implications of the position-momentum commutation relation and

625: the associated uncertainty principle:

626: ``The equation $pq-qp = h/2 \pi i$ thus corresponds always in

627: the wave representation to the fact that it is impossible

628: to speak of a monochromatic wave at a fixed point in time

629: (or in a very short time interval) ... Analogously, it is

630: impossible to talk of the position of a particle of fixed

631: velocity''.  Schrodinger (1930) subsequently proved the general

632: relation between the commutation relations and the uncertainty

633: relations. The founders of quantum mechanics thus were

634: well aware of the connection between the two kinds of relations.

635: A general derivation of the uncertainty relations from the

636: commutator relations can be found in Sakurai (1985, p.34).

637: 

638: The uncertainty principle is thus just another way of writing 

639: the commutation relations, which themselves are deterministic.

640: The uncertainty principle itself seemed to have later acquired more

641: prominence in the quantum discussions only because of its 

642: intimate relation to the probabilistic outcome of quantum 

643: measurements.

644: 

645: It is well-known that quantum commutation relations can be

646: linked to classical Poisson brackets in the ``correspondence

647: principle'' sense of the quantum to classical transition (Goldstein

648: 1980, p.399).  This tight correlation between the two formulations 

649: demonstrates once again that the physics in the two regimes

650: is closely linked, and the form of classical dynamics itself is already

651: a result of the modal selection in the universe resonant cavity

652: (we will comment more on this in section 3.2.10).

653: 

654: The special characteristic of the quantum commutation relations 

655: of course is the ever-present Planck's constant h, which sets the

656: scale of quantum interactions.  The historical introduction

657: of Planck's constant of course is through the well-known

658: exploration of the functional dependence of blackbody radiation

659: on wavelength and temperature (see Agassi 1993 for a chronological

660: account), which leads to Planck's discovery of the famous $E=h \nu$ 

661: equation signaling the beginning of the quantum era.  

662: Once the value of h is obtained by a comparison

663: of Planck's blackbody formula

664: with the empirical blackbody curve, its subsequent

665: entry into quantum mechanics is through a series of ``correspondence''

666: type of analogies: i.e. Bohr's assumption of discrete energy levels of

667: atoms as the origin of discrete spectra; Heisenberg's ingenious application

668: of correspondence principle which leads to the first incidence of

669: a quantum commutation relation; de Broglie's generalization of the

670: quanta energy and momentum relations to that of material particles;

671: and Schrodinger's derivation of his famous wave equation through

672: the integration of de Broglie formula and classical mechanics.

673: Thus, the root of quantized behavior (or at least our discovery of it)

674: goes back to the source of cosmic blackbody radiation (even though

675: at the time of Planck he was mostly focused on the blackbody radiation

676: in a small box), which we know is related to the universe 

677: resonant cavity as a whole!

678: 

679: The relation between the quantum and classical modal behavior allows

680: us to borrow the tools developed for analyzing classical nonequilibrium 

681: structures (Zhang 1996, 1998) and resonant phenomena (Cohen 1995) towards

682: a deeper understanding of the behavior of quantum systems.

683: 

684: \subsubsection{Quantum Vacuum}

685: 

686: After quantizing space with a set of modes using the commutation or

687: anticommutation relations, we expect to end up with some leftovers, 

688: and these leftover fractional modal content we propose is the 

689: composition of vacuum fluctuations.

690: 

691: The vacuum field fluctuates because the resonant components keep evolving

692: in the nonequilibrium universe cavity, just like in another example of

693: such a nonequilibrium phase transition, that of the spiral structure in

694: galaxies (Zhang 1998), where the individual star's trajectory keeps evolving 

695: and moving in and out of the spiral pattern even though total energy is 

696: conserved and the spiral pattern is meta-stable.

697: 

698: This picture provides a possible explanation of why 

699: many fundamental physical effects (such as Lamb shifts,

700: Casimir effects, spontaneous emission, van der Waals forces, and

701: the fundamental linewidth of a laser) can be explained equally successfully

702: by adopting either the vacuum-fluctuation point of view

703: or the source-field point of view (see, e.g., Milonni 1994 and the

704: references therein).

705: 

706: Addition of metal plates as in Casimir effect changes the boundary

707: condition of the entire vacuum, and force is thus needed to put the plates in.

708: The energetically most favorable arrangement of the resonances is thus

709: changed.  So is the modal structure.

710: 

711: The relation of field quantization and vacuum fluctuation  may also be

712: related to the ``fluctuation-dissipation theorem''.  The dissipative

713: leaks into the vacuum is needed to maintain the stability of the nonequilibrium

714: modes.   The universe also has to be constantly evolving in order for the 

715: fundamental resonances to be stable.

716: So the un-saturatedness and the constant evolving nature of the universe

717: maybe a prerequisite for setting up the fundamental laws as we

718: observe today.  

719: 

720: \subsubsection{Lifetime of Levels and Virtual Particles}

721: 

722: Since quantizations of physical systems do not happen in a closed box, 

723: but rather in an open and evolving universe, there is 

724: a continuous exchange of any given mode with the underlying continuum.  

725: The modal characteristics thus formed are not always sharp, which allowed

726: the existence of wavepackets, as well as the finite lifetimes of

727: ``fundamental particles'' and ``eigenstates''.  These quasi-stationary 

728: states are generally in dynamical equilibrium.  The quantization 

729: characteristic is manifestly the sharpest during the emission/detection 

730: process, which is a true non-equilibrium phase transition -- but even

731: there the emitted photons/particles may not immediately be in a

732: momentum eigenstate.  A photon during propagation is not always in a \

733: pure momentum eigenstate, but has smear, as we will comment further below.

734: 

735: Virtual particles are those which appear in a quantum electrodynamic

736: calculation and do not satisfy energy and angular momentum conservation: 

737: They are ``not on the mass shell'' and are represented by the

738: internal lines in Feynman diagrams (Feynman 1949;

739: Dyson 1949). Their existence is another indication 

740: that a quantum phase transition involves the rest of the universe to 

741: ``close the loop'', and the conservation relation is restored for resonant 

742: interactions only when the phase transition is complete. 

743: 

744: \subsubsection{First and Higher Order Coherence of Photons and Atoms.

745: Identical Particles.  Blackbody Radiation}

746: 

747: When Dirac commented that ``A photon interferes only with itself'' (Dirac 1958),

748: he referred to the first order coherence properties of photons.

749: Subsequent intensity interferometry experiments (Hanbury Brown \&

750: Twiss 1954, 1956; Hanbury Brown 1974)

751: had revealed that photons do interfere with one another, 

752: which are the higher order coherence properties of photons. 

753: Such first and higher order coherence properties were also confirmed

754: for atoms in the atom interferometry experiments (see the contributions

755: in Berman eds. 1997).

756: 

757: In the current ontology, the first order coherence of the atoms and

758: photons reveals their underlying wave and modal nature, whereas the

759: higher order correlation is a manifestation of the finite-Q nature 

760: of the universe resonant cavity, resulting in ``non-pure'' spatial modes

761: which entangles the individual particles or field resonances.

762: Due to the entanglement (as reflected in the Bose-Einstein or

763: Fermi-Dirac statistics, for example, which can be regarded as different

764: types of global mode organizations), after quantized emission 

765: a photon has a tendency to merge back to the universal ``soup'' 

766: of the background photon flux during propagation, unless the photon

767: flux is so low that it can be described as spatially and temperally

768: separated monophotonic states (Hong, Ou, \& Mandel 1987), in which

769: case its degree of second order coherence $g^2(0) <1$ as is appropriate

770: for photons in the non-classical photon number states (Loudon 1983).  

771: The analytical expressions for the degree of second order coherence 

772: for bosons and fermions show different expressions according to

773: their respective wavefunction symmetries (Scully \& Zubairy 1997,

774: p.125), and these statistics are only meaningful when the particle

775: flux is high enough.

776: 

777: The existence of second or higher order coherence does not require that 

778: the wave be non-classical (i.e. quantized, see Hanbury Brown 1974).

779: In some sense, a classical wave itself embodies the correlation between

780: its constituent parts, and there is

781: no clear dividing line between the classical and the quantum worlds.

782: It is only by convention (or chronology) that we refer to the particle nature 

783: of the photons as nonclassical and the wave nature as classical, whereas

784: for massive particles our convention is the reverse.

785: 

786: The correlation and entanglement characteristic is needed to 

787: make sense of the coherent length and coherent time of photon waves.  

788: It would be meaningless to talk in such terms if each photon 

789: is completely independent of the other ones.  For coherent length 

790: to matter for the easiness of wavefunction collapse during a 

791: quantum measurement, as in the comparison of

792: beam splitter decoherence in either the laser or Bose-Einstein 

793: condensate cases (Zhang 2005), the relevant particles

794: must have mutual interactions during propagation. Otherwise only

795: the first order coherence will matter.  

796: Furthermore, the correlation between the coherence length 

797: or coherence time with the bandwidth of electromagnetic radiation 

798: also indicates the global nature of the underlying modes, that the universe 

799: cavity is connected and shared among the different energy quanta.

800: 

801: The internal correlation is also revealed in the equation of

802: blackbody radiation.  Ehrenfest (1911) had already realized that

803: independent quanta could only lead to Wien's law, but not Planck's law.  

804: Thus, if light quanta were to be described by the Planck distribution,

805: they had to lack statistical independence and show wave-type correlation

806: through satisfying Bose-Einstein statistics

807: (Ehrenfest \& Kamerling-Onnes 1915; Bose 1924).

808: 

809: \subsubsection{Spontaneous Quantum Measurements in Naturally Occuring

810: Orders}

811: 

812: Under the new ontology there is no longer a dichotomy between 

813: the classical and the quantum world.  The classical systems consist 

814: of subunits where ``wavefunction collapse'' have already been induced 

815: by nature, through naturally occurring boundary conditions.  

816: A macroscopic object does not possess an overall quantum mechanical

817: wavefunction that freely evolves.  The different hierarchies of

818: the macroscopic system established by non-equilibrium phase

819: transitions have quasi-autonomy.

820: 

821: The spontaneous nature of the phase transitions in natural systems

822: helps to resolve ``Schrodinger's Cat'' type of paradoxes 

823: (Schrodinger 1935), since a

824: naturally occurring ``quantum measurement'' does not have to

825: involve a conscious observer.  The cat in question was already in

826: a definitive live or dead state before the observer opened the box,

827: and not in a linear superposition state of the kind $a \cdot Alive + b \cdot

828: Dead$.  The possibility that naturally

829: occurring orders are results of non-equilibrium

830: phase transitions also explains the stability

831: and reproducibility of these natural orders, i.e., the result

832: of the non-equilibrium phase transitions is insensitive to the

833: {\em details} of the initial-boundary conditions, and depends

834: only on the gross nature of these conditions.

835: 

836: Such views have also been expressed by the founder of the

837: dissipative structure theory I. Prigogine (1997):``But once it is

838: shown that instability breaks time symmetry, the observer is

839: no longer essential.  In solving the time paradox, we also solved

840: the quantum paradox''.

841: 

842: \subsubsection{The Form and Origin of Physical Laws.  Values of

843: Fundamental Constants}

844: 

845: The physical laws, both classical and quantum,

846: can often be derived from least action or variational

847: principles (Goldstein 1980; Weinberg 1996). 

848: This behavior generally reflects the fact that the energy 

849: content of the process under concern is distributed globally, and the

850: process samples the environmental/boundary conditions of the entire space 

851: of relevance.  In the case of the classical trajectory of particles, 

852: this is reflected in Feynman's rule of sum over all possible paths

853: (Feynman \& Hibbs 1965).

854: The quantum laws of count statistics for identical particles 

855: (from which the Planck's law was derived from)

856: are valid also because the universe is a connected 

857: resonant cavity. 

858: 

859: The relations between symmetry and the conservation (Noether's

860: theorem, see, e.g. Goldstein 1980) indicate that the 

861: dynamical equations (both classical

862: and quantum) have already incorporated (or is consistent with)

863: the symmetry of spacetime, i.e., the equations and laws themselves are 

864: selected by the universe resonant cavity.  This is reasonable since both

865: the equations and the fundamental constants are likely to be a result of

866: spontaneous breaking of gauge symmetry, whose occurrence is closely

867: related to the state of the matter in the universe.

868: 

869: If values of the fundamental constants are determined

870: by the characteristics of the universe resonant cavity,

871: the variation of the values of these ``constants'' with time

872: (such as the recent observation of the likelihood of the

873: variation of the fine-structure constant) would be naturally

874: expected if the universe resonant cavity changes with time,

875: e.g. due to the expansion of the universe and the associated

876: evolution of matter distribution.

877: 

878: \subsection{Connections with the Past and Current Practices 

879: in Quantum Theories}

880: 

881: The discussions in the following had benefited greatly

882: from the survey studies of the development

883: of 20th century field theories of Cao (1997).

884: 

885: \subsubsection{S-Matrix Theory}

886: 

887: In the 1950s and 60s the S-matrix theory, first proposed by Heisenberg 

888: (1943a,b, 1944) and later espoused by Chew and collaborators (Chew 1961 and

889: the references therein),  was enjoying the popularity 

890: the quantum field theories later enjoyed.  The motivation for the

891: theory is from processes such as Compton scattering which shows 

892: that light quanta comes in and goes off as approximate plane waves.

893: 

894: In this theory, the dynamics were not specified by a detailed

895: model of interaction in spacetime, but were determined by the

896: singularity structure of the scattering amplitudes, subject to

897: the requirement of maximal analyticity.  The success of the 

898: S-matrix approach is likely to be due to the fact that the 

899: underlying physics obeys global, modal characteristics.

900: The calculation scheme in this theory was carried out on the

901: mass shell, which is fine since it only concerns the input and output

902: states, or the results of phase transition, and hence involves 

903: only asymptotic states where particles were outside each other's region

904: of interaction.

905: 

906: \subsubsection{Quantum Field Theories:

907: Renormalization and Feynman's Diagrammatic Approach}

908: 

909: In quantum field theories, such as quantum electrodynamics (QED), 

910: the interaction is transmitted by the discrete quanta of the 

911: electromagnetic field, and the interacting particles are 

912: considered the quanta of a fermion field. 

913: All such quanta can be created and destroyed.

914: 

915: Quantum field theory describes local interactions between

916: particles and fields.  In view of our previous discussions,

917: that all interactions in the quantum world should be global

918: by nature since they are in essence phase transitions in

919: the universe cavity, we wonder how this could be reconciled

920: with the apparent success of quantum field theory.  In the 

921: following, we argue that many of the approaches adopted in

922: quantum field theory calculations have in fact incorporated

923: the global nature of the underlying processes.

924: 

925: For many quantum field processes such as scattering,

926: the amplitudes are calculated from the chosen input and output 

927: states, which are generally expressed in plane wave forms.

928: Invariably in these calculations the exact behavior of

929: particles at the supposed ``locations'' of interaction

930: are not specified in detail.  This shows that the supposedly

931: local quantum field calculations incorporated features of

932: a global approach as in the S-matrix approach (Chew 1961).

933: Scattering effectively becomes persistent scattering and neither

934: starts nor stops.

935: 

936: Some of the common practices in quantum field calculations, 

937: such as Feynman's diagrammatic approach (Feynman 1949; 

938: Dyson 1949, which has its lineage in the S-matrix approach),

939: are also integral representations of the entire

940: phase transition process, described in terms of

941: input and output states and omitting any detailed

942: description of the ``on-location'' behavior of

943: the interaction and particle generation/annihilation.

944: 

945: Another feature that indicates the insufficiency of

946: a purely local description is the need of renormalization

947: in quantum field theories.  It was first realized by

948: Weisskopf (1939) that the electromagnetic behavior of the electron 

949: in quantum field theory is not completely point-like,

950: but is extended over a finite region.  This extension, 

951: keeps the divergence of the self-energy within the logarithmic divergence

952: which made the renormalization procedure possible.

953: 

954: The elementary phenomena in which divergences occur are the polarization 

955: of the vacuum and the self-energy of the electron (Schwinger 1948, 1949a,b).  

956: Each of these phenomena describes the interaction of one field with the vacuum 

957: fluctuations of the other field -- once again a reflection of the

958: global nature of quantum interactions.  The overall effect 

959: is to alter the values of the electron charge e and mass m,

960: which are compensated by charge and mass renormalization.

961: 

962: The local interactions described by quantum field theories

963: are for parts and parcels of fields.  Yet like the case of any 

964: dissipative structures, the local characteristics are determined

965: by the global organization and the global dynamical equilibrium.

966: The local organization on the other hand reflects features

967: of the global organization, in this case through the need of

968: renormalization to obtain a self-consistent theory.

969: 

970: The need for renormalization of any quantum field theories results

971: not only from the local/global dichotomy between quantum field

972: theories and quantum process, it also originate from the

973: fundamental incompatibility of quantum theory with relativity

974: theory. QED as a relativistic generalization of quantum

975: mechanics is not self-consistent (other than in its non-interacting

976: limit: in which case we obtain pure modes and no non-equilibrium

977: phase transitions).  The effect of spontaneous

978: quantum measurements to order the processes into hierarchies

979: is incorporated through the procedure of renormalization.  Empirical

980: input is needed to construct a self-consistent theory due to

981: the singular nature of phase transitions whose details

982: cannot be models in a top-down deductive type of analysis.

983: As Gross (1985) puts it: ``Renormalization is an expression of the variation

984: of the structure of physical interactions with changes in the scale

985: of the phenomena being probed''.

986: 

987: 

988: \subsubsection{Gauge Field Theories, Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking, 

989: and Effective Field Theories}

990: 

991: Gauge field theories emerged within the framework of quantum

992: field theories, and is very powerful in exploring global features of 

993: field theories.  In this theory the phase of a wave function 

994: becomes a new local variable.  The invariance of a theory under 

995: the {\em} global phase change, or a gauge transformation

996: of the first kind, entails charge conservation.  The {\em local} 

997: gauge invariance is related to the electromagnetic interaction.

998: 

999: The existence of gauge principle for the determination of the

1000: forms of fundamental interactions indicates that the dynamical

1001: laws have been co-selected in the universe resonant cavity

1002: as the processes themselves.  The forms of the fundamental interactions

1003: must preserve and alter the modal structure of the underlying matter

1004: and energy distribution in a globally self-consistent way.

1005: In this sense, the experience gained in obtaining the globally

1006: self-consistent solutions for classical nonequilibrium

1007: structures (Zhang 1998) can be used to gain deeper insight into the

1008: organization structure of quantum laws and fields.

1009: 

1010: Spontaneous symmetry breaking was developed as a mechanism to

1011: preserve gauge invariance when dealing with massive gauge quanta.

1012: The generation of fundamental interactions through spontaneous 

1013: symmetry breaking is viable since in general ``The solutions of the 

1014: equations will possess a lower symmetry than the equations themselves''  

1015: (Landau 1958, quoted in Brown and Rechenberg 1988).  The spontaneous 

1016: symmetry breaking first proposed by Heisenberg and collaborators 

1017: (Durr et al. 1959) is concerned with the low-energy behavior of the solutions

1018: and asserts that some low energy solutions exhibit less symmetry than

1019: the symmetry exhibited by the Lagrangian of the system, while others

1020: possess the full symmetry of the system.

1021: 

1022: Since the late 1970s theorists gradually realized that the high-energy 

1023: effects in gauge theories can be calculated without taking the cutoff 

1024: in the renormalization approach to infinity.  The cutoffs in these 

1025: Effective Field Theories (Weinberg 1980) acquire physical significance 

1026: as the embodiment of the hierarchical structure of quantum field theory, 

1027: and as a boundary separating energy regions which are separately 

1028: describable by different sets of parameters and different 

1029: interactions with different symmetries.  Non-renormalizable theories 

1030: can also be treated as effective field theories incorporating

1031: empirical input from the experiments.

1032: 

1033: Thus it appears the new picture offered by the modern development of field

1034: theories points also to a kind of hierarchical organization of the

1035: high-energy world through successive phase transitions. Each layer of the

1036: hierarchy is quasi-autonomous, each has its own ontology and 

1037: the associated ``fundamental laws''.  The ontology and dynamics of 

1038: each layer are quasi-stable, nearly (but not totally)

1039: immune to whatever happen in other layers.

1040: 

1041: \subsection{Issues Requiring Further Study}

1042: 

1043: \subsubsection{Connection of Quantum Mechanical Measurement Process

1044: with Relativity Theories}

1045: 

1046: The quantum measurement processes, especially the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen

1047: (1935) type or delayed-choice (Wheeler 1978) type of experiments, 

1048: clearly show both the global extent of the wavefunction 

1049: and the superluminal nature of the wavefunction collapse.

1050: 

1051: Since special relativity dictates that physical signals travel

1052: with a speed less than the speed of light c, this element of the

1053: wavefunction collapse requires further study.

1054: Furthermore, we could ask questions such as whether the speed of 

1055: a single-particle wavefunction collapse depends on the spatial spread of the

1056: wavefunction, and whether the instantaneous wavefunction collapse

1057: corresponds to instantaneous energy propagation as well.

1058: 

1059: In fact, the ontology of relativity theories may itself

1060: need to be further elucidated. Questions we could ask include:

1061: Why is there a speed-of-light limit?  Is it only there 

1062: for certain levels of hierarchy and not for others (see next section)?

1063: If in the eye of light, the world is but a single point, how could

1064: changes and evolution ever be possible?  Does that mean for light

1065: the external degrees-of-freedom get transformed into the internal 

1066: degrees-of-freedom to allow evolution?

1067: The essential incompatibility of relativity theory and quantum mechanics,

1068: i.e. the loss of Lorentz invariance in quantum measurement processes

1069: needs to be further explored.

1070:  

1071: \subsubsection{Hierarchy of Laws and Mach's Principle}

1072: 

1073: We have commented that it appears that the speed of light limit

1074: holds for classical physical processes as well as non-measurement

1075: or non-phase-transition type quantum processes.

1076: This is an indication that the workings of the physical world

1077: may be organized into hierarchies.  Even though in the lower hierarchy

1078: the speed of light is a fundamental limit to signal propagation,

1079: the same is not true for wavefunction collapse.  

1080: 

1081: Furthermore, we expect that the establishment of the fundamental laws and 

1082: the selection of fundamental constants through the resonant interaction

1083: in the universe cavity according to Mach's principle are also themselves

1084: processes which are not constrained by the speed of light limit:

1085: For otherwise the mere size of the universe and the cycle of 

1086: propagations needed to resonantly establish a fundamental constant

1087: would make it impossible for these constants and laws to be universal

1088: and atemporal (at least over short time span).  

1089: The statistical laws of physics, such as Einstein's A and B coefficients 

1090: for spontaneous and stimulated emission (Einstein 1917), and Planck's 

1091: radiation law, would not be valid and universal if the impact of the entire 

1092: content of the universe is not communicated instantaneously.

1093: The variational approach for the selection

1094: of laws (as indicated by the Lagrangian type of derivation)

1095: only works if all possible paths are ``explored'' acausally. 

1096: The fact that in the variational approach the different path explored

1097: are not constrained by the speed of light limit is evidenced

1098: from Feynman's path integral formulation (Feynman \& Hibbs 1965).

1099: 

1100: As commented by Barbour \& Pfister (1995),

1101: ``It is often not sufficiently appreciated how kind nature

1102: has been in supplying us with `subsystems' of the universe which

1103: possess characteristic properties that can be described and measured

1104: almost without recourse to the rest of the universe. ... On the

1105: other hand, it is evident that basic concepts such as `inertia'

1106: and `centrifugal force' cannot be understood and explained within

1107: the context of the subsystems themselves, but at best by taking

1108: into account the rest of the universe''.  That refers to Mach's

1109: original speculations on the origin of inertia.  By the same token

1110: other properties of the universe cavity such as the quantization

1111: unit h are expected to be determined by the entire universe as well.

1112: 

1113: Questions requiring further work to answer include: What 

1114: characteristics of the universe resonant cavity generate the

1115: fundamental constants (presumably as eigenvalues)?  How do the

1116: different levels of hierarchy interact? etc.

1117: 

1118: \subsubsection{Causality of the Quantum Processes}

1119: 

1120: The global nature of the quantum phase transitions also demands

1121: us to alter our traditional notions of cause and effect.

1122: The boundary between causes and effects are now blurred, and

1123: there is now only an intertwined co-evolution of all the 

1124: parts of the universe resonant cavity, strictly speaking --

1125: though the hierarchical structure of orders in the universe

1126: due to the successive phase transitions allows the emergence 

1127: of macroscopic objects and classical phenomena which conform 

1128: to our notion of the cause-and-effect.

1129: 

1130: At a deeper level though, we could not ignore the fact that

1131: we have now a kind of more distributed and global causality.

1132: It was already known since the early days of quantum mechanics

1133: that radiative phenomena cannot be analyzed causally.  The stability

1134: of the atom shows that there cannot be a classical type of causal

1135: process in the radiability of the atom.  Scattering of quantum particles

1136: likewise is also a distributed process which could not be analyzed

1137: as a causal sequence.  In this picture, forces as exchange of particles 

1138: serve to realize an energetically more favorable configuration.

1139: 

1140: Other evidence of the new causality include the description of many

1141: natural processes using analytical signals.  To know an analytical

1142: signal at time t we have to know the real signal at all times: This

1143: once again shows the global influence of the modal behavior.

1144: 

1145: Mach himself summarizes this intermingled state of cause and effect

1146: in the self-sustained universe as follows: ``Thus the law of causality

1147: is sufficiently characterized by saying that it is the presupposition

1148: of the mutual dependence of phenomena.  Certain idle questions,

1149: for example, whether the cause precedes or is simultaneous with the

1150: effect, then vanish by themselves'' (Mach 1911); as well as

1151: ``The universe is not given us twice, but only once''.

1152: 

1153: The many consequences of this new meaning of quantum causality

1154: need to be further explored.

1155: 

1156: \subsubsection{The Possibility of Free Will in A Universe Governed

1157: by Deterministic Physical Laws}

1158: 

1159: Does the deterministic ontology presented in this paper

1160: prohibit the emergence of free-will of sentient beings, which

1161: we know from personal experiences do exist?

1162: 

1163: From the work of Yang and Lee (1952), we know that the sharpness of

1164: the phase transitions in classical statistical systems is related

1165: to the effective number of degree-of-freedom of the system.

1166: In the new ontology, the effective degree-of-freedom of the physical phenomena

1167: in the universe resonant cavity is non-denumerably infinite, since

1168: we are dealing with a true continuum made up of the smooth reservoir

1169: of energy, and the discreteness we observe in the physical universe

1170: is merely resonant modal behavior formed in the universe cavity.

1171: 

1172: The infinitely-sensitive dependence on the details of perturbations 

1173: of an infinite degree-of-freedom

1174: system is likely to be the cause of the indeterministic 

1175: factor in the generation of free will, though the detailed workings of

1176: the free-will generation process still require further study.  

1177: This indeterministic factor in free will is not to be confused with 

1178: the quantum uncertainty relations, which are themselves only a derived 

1179: property of the exact quantum commutation relations.

1180: The indeterministic factor in the phase transitions of an infinite

1181: degree-of-freedom system allows chance to play a role, 

1182: and introduces an element of 

1183: history into the course of evolution of the universe.

1184: 

1185: \section{Conclusions}

1186: 

1187: In this paper, we argue that even though the quantum mechanical paradigm 

1188: is the correct description of microscopic phenomena, unitary evolution

1189: is not the only guiding principle.  To that we need to add the principle

1190: of phase-transition in the universe resonant cavity, and this principle 

1191: is responsible for organizing both the physical laws and natural orders 

1192: into hierarchies.  Both the amplitude and the phase of the quantum 

1193: mechanical wavefunction are substantial in nature, and the probability

1194: element is removed from the foundations of quantum mechanics.

1195: An effectively classical ontology is provided for the quantum processes.

1196: 

1197: The new ontology on the foundations of quantum mechanics and especially 

1198: on the nature of quantum measurements leads to a coherent interpretation 

1199: of a wide spectrum of phenomena in the quantum as well as the classical 

1200: world.  It also provides a framework for understanding and coherently 

1201: linking many diverse results in quantum field theories which have been

1202: accumulated over the past few decades.  As a working hypothesis, it could 

1203: serve to stimulate a new synthesis on our understanding of the workings 

1204: of the physical universe.

1205: 

1206: This research was supported in part by funding from the Office of

1207: Naval Research.

1208: 

1209: \section{References}

1210: 

1211: \noindent

1212: Agassi, J. 1993, Radiation Theory and the Quantum Revolution 

1213: (iBasel: Birkhauser)

1214: 

1215: \noindent

1216: Aharonov, Y., \& Bohm, D. 1959, Phys. Rev. (Ser. 2) 115, 485

1217: 

1218: \noindent

1219: Aichele, T., Herzog, U., Scholz, M., \& Benson, O. 2004, quant-ph/0410112

1220: 

1221: \noindent

1222: Alley, C.O., Jakubowicz, O.G., \& Wicks, W.C. 1987, in Proc. Second

1223: International Symposium Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, eds.

1224: M. Namiki et al. (Tokyo: Phy. Soc. Japan), p.36

1225: 

1226: \noindent

1227: Aspect, A. 1976, Phys. Rev. D14, 1944

1228: 

1229: \noindent

1230: Aspect, A., Grangier, P., \& Roger, G. 1981, Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 460

1231: 

1232: \noindent

1233: Barbour, J. \& Pfister, H. 1995, Mach's Principle: From

1234: Newton's Bucket to Quantum Gravity (Boston: Birkhauser)

1235: 

1236: \noindent

1237: Bell, J.S. 1965, Physics, 1, 195

1238: 

1239: \noindent

1240: Berman, P.R. ed. 1997, Atom Interferometry (San Diego: Academic Press)

1241: 

1242: \noindent

1243: Bohr, N. 1928, Nature, 121, 580

1244: 

1245: \noindent

1246: Born, M. 1926, Zeitschrift fur Physik, 37, 863, English version in

1247: Wheeler \& Zurek eds. Quantum Theory and Measurement (1983), p. 52

1248: 

1249: \noindent

1250: Bose, S.N. 1924, Zeitschrift fur Physik, 26, 178

1251: 

1252: \noindent

1253: Braginsky, V.B.,  \& Khalili, F.Y. 1992, Quantum Measurement,

1254: (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)

1255: 

1256: \noindent

1257: Briegel, H.J., Englert, B.G., Scully, M.O., \& Walther, H. 1997,

1258: in Atom Interferometry, ed. P.R. Berman (San Diego: Academic Press), p. 217

1259: 

1260: \noindent

1261: Brown, L.M., \& Rechenberg, H. 1988, in Landau's work on quantum Field

1262: theory and high energy physics (1930-1961), 

1263: Max Planck Institute preprint, MPI-PAE/Pth 44/88 (July 1988)

1264: 

1265: \noindent

1266: Cao, T.Y. 1997, Conceptual Developments of 20th Century Field

1267: Theories (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)

1268: 

1269: \noindent

1270: Chew, G.F. 1961, S-Matrix Theory of Strong Interactions (New York:

1271: Benjamin)

1272: 

1273: \noindent

1274: Chiao, R.Y., Kwait, P.G., \& Steinberg, A.M. 1994, in ``Advances in Atomic,

1275: Molecular, and Optical Physics'', B. Bederson \& H. Walther eds., vol 34,

1276: (New York: Academic Press), p. 35

1277: 

1278: \noindent

1279: Cohen, L. 1995, Time-Frequency Analysis (New Jersey: Prentice Hall)

1280: 

1281: \noindent

1282: DeWitt, B.S. 1970, Phys. Today, 23, 30

1283: 

1284: \noindent

1285: DeWitt, B.S. 2005, Physics Today, January issue

1286:  

1287: \noindent

1288: Dirac, P.A.M. 1926, Proc. Royal Soc. London, vol. 112, No. 762, p. 661

1289: 

1290: \noindent

1291: Dirac, P.A.M. 1927, Proc. Royal Soc. London, vol. A113, p. 621

1292:  

1293: \noindent

1294: Dirac, P.A.M. 1958, The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, 4th edition (Oxford:

1295: Oxford Univ. Press)

1296: 

1297: \noindent

1298: Durr, H.P., Heisenberg, W., Mitter, H., Schlieder, S., \& Yamazaki, K. 1959,

1299: Zeitschrift fur Naturforschung, 14A, 441

1300: 

1301: \noindent

1302: Dyson, F. 1949, Phys. Rev. 75, 486

1303: 

1304: \noindent

1305: Ehrenfest, P. 1911, Ann. Phys., 36, 91

1306: 

1307: \noindent

1308: Ehrenfest, P. \& Kamerling-Onnes, H. 1915, Proc. Amsterdam Acad. 23, 789

1309: 

1310: \noindent

1311: Einstein, A. 1917, Phys. Z. 18, 121, English translation by

1312: D. ter Harr 1967, The Old Quantum Theory (New York: Pergamon Press), p.167

1313: 

1314: \noindent

1315: Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., \& Rosen, N. 1925, Phys. Rev. 47, 777

1316: 

1317: \noindent

1318: Everett III, H. 1957, Rev. Modern. Phys. 29, 455

1319: 

1320: \noindent

1321: Feynman, R.P. 1949, Phys. Rev. 76, 769

1322: 

1323: \noindent

1324: Feynman, R.P., \& Hibbs, A.R. 1965, Quantum Mechanics and Path Integrals

1325: (New York: McGraw-Hill)

1326: 

1327: \noindent

1328: Glansdorf, P., \& Prigogine, I. 1971, Thermodynamic Theory of

1329: Structure, \indent Stability and Fluctuations (New York: Wiley-Interscience)

1330: 

1331: \noindent

1332: Goldstein, H. 1980, Classical Mechanics, 2nd ed. (Menlo Park: Addison-Wesley)

1333: 

1334: \noindent

1335: Gross, D. 1985, in Recent Developments in Quantum Field Theories, J. Ambjorn,

1336: B.J. Durhuus, and J.L. Petersen, eds., (Amsterdam: Elsevier), p. 151

1337: 

1338: \noindent

1339: Hanbury Brown, R. 1974, The Intensity Interferometer (London: Taylor and 

1340: Francis)

1341: 

1342: \noindent

1343: Hanbury Brown, R. \& Twiss, R.Q. 1954, Philos. Mag., Ser. 7, No. 45,

1344: 663

1345: 

1346: \noindent

1347: Hanbury Brown, R. \& Twiss, R.Q. 1956, Nature, 178, 1046

1348: 

1349: \noindent

1350: Heisenberg, W. 1926, in Pauli, W., Wissenschaftlicher 

1351: Briefwechsel mit Bohr, Einstein, Heisenberg, u.  A., 

1352: Band I: 1919-1929, eds. Hermann, A., Meyenn, K.V., and Weisskopf, V.E.

1353: (Berlin:Springer, 1979)

1354: 

1355: \noindent

1356: Heisenberg, W. 1927, Zeitschrift fur Physik, 43, 172, English version

1357: in Wheeler \& Zurek eds. Quantum Theory and Measurement (1983), p. 62

1358: 

1359: \noindent

1360: Heisenberg, W. 1943a, Zeitschrift fur Physik, 120, 513

1361: 

1362: \noindent

1363: Heisenberg, W. 1943b, Zeitschrift fur Physik, 120, 673

1364: 

1365: \noindent

1366: Heisenberg, W. 1944, Zeitschrift fur Physik, 123, 93

1367: 

1368: \noindent

1369: Hellmuth, T., Walther, H., Zajonc, A., \& Schkeich, W. 1987, Phys. Rev. A, 35, 2532

1370: 

1371: \noindent

1372: Hong, C.K., Ou, A.Y., \& Mandel, L. 1987, Physical Review Letters,

1373: Vol. 59, No. 18, 2044

1374: 

1375: \noindent

1376: Koschmieder, E.L. 1993, Benard Cells and Taylor Vortices (Cambridge:

1377: Cambridge Univ. Press)

1378: 

1379: \noindent

1380: Landau, L.D., \& Peierls, R. 1931, Z. Phys. 69, 56

1381: 

1382: \noindent

1383: Loudon, R. 1983, The Quantum Theory of Light (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press)

1384: 

1385: \noindent

1386: Mach, E. 1911, History and Root of the Principle of the

1387: Conservation of Energy, P. Jourdain, trans. Chicago: Open Court

1388: (Translation of Mach 1872), p.61

1389: 

1390: \noindent

1391: Milonni, P.W. 1994, The Quantum Vacuum: An Introduction to Quantum

1392: Electrodynamics (San Diego: Academic Press)

1393: 

1394: \noindent

1395: Moore, W.J. 1989, Schrodinger: Life and Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ.

1396: Press)

1397: 

1398: \noindent

1399: Mott, N.F. 1929, Proc. Royal Soc. London, A126, 79

1400: 

1401: \noindent

1402: Nambu, Y. 1949, Prog. Theor. Phys. 4, 82

1403: 

1404: \noindent

1405: Namiki, M., Pascazio, S., \& Nakazayo, H. 1997, Decoherence and Quantum

1406: Measurements (New Jersey: World Scientific)

1407: 

1408: \noindent

1409: Nicolis, G., \& Prigogine, I. 1977, Self-Organization in Nonequilibrium

1410: \newline \indent Systems (New York: Wiley-Intersciences)

1411: 

1412: \noindent

1413: Popper, K.R. 1935, The Logic of Scientific Discovery (Vienna: Verlag von

1414: Julius Springer), first English edition published in 1959 by

1415: Hutchinson \& Co (London)

1416: 

1417: \noindent Prigogine, I. 1997, The End of Certainty (Freepress)

1418: 

1419: \noindent

1420: Sakurai, J.J. 1985, Modern Quantum Mechanics (New York: Addison-Wesley)

1421: 

1422: \noindent

1423: Schmiedmayer, J., Chapman, M.S., Ekstrom, C.K., Hammond, T.D.,

1424: Kokorowski, D.A., Lenet, A., Rubenstein, R.A., Smith, E.T., \&

1425: Pritchard, D.E. 1997, in Berman ed. Atom Interferometry (San Diego:

1426: Academic Press), p.2

1427: 

1428: \noindent

1429: Schrodinger, E. 1926a, Die Naturwissenschaften 28, p.664

1430: 

1431: \noindent

1432: Schrodinger, E. 1926b, Annalen der Physik (4), vol. 79, p.45

1433: 

1434: \noindent

1435: Schrodinger, E. 1926c, Annalen der Physik (4), vol. 81, p.109

1436: 

1437: \noindent

1438: Schrodinger, E. 1930, S.B. Preuss. Akad. Wiss., p.296, see

1439: also W.T. Scott 1967,``Erwin Schrodinger: An Introduction to His Writings'',

1440: (Amherst, Univ. Mass. Press), p.64

1441: 

1442: \noindent

1443: Schrodinger, E. 1935, Naturwissenschaften 23, 807; English translation

1444: by J.D. Trimmer, 1980, Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. 124, 323

1445: 

1446: \noindent

1447: Schwinger, J. 1948, Phys. Rev. 74, 1439

1448: 

1449: \noindent

1450: Schwinger, J. 1949a, Phys. Rev. 75, 651

1451: 

1452: \noindent

1453: Schwinger, J. 1949b, Phys. Rev. 76, 790

1454: 

1455: \noindent

1456: Scully, M.O., \& Zubairy, M.S. 1997, Quantum Optics (Cambridge:

1457: Cambridge University Press)

1458: 

1459: \noindent

1460: Von Newmann, J. 1927, Wahrscheinlichkeits-theoretischer

1461: Aufbau der Quantenmechanik, Gottinger Nachrichten I, No. 10,

1462: 245

1463: 

1464: \noindent

1465: Von Newmann, J. 1932, Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantem Mechanik. (Berlin:

1466: Spinger)

1467: 

1468: \noindent

1469: Weinberg, S. 1995, The Quantum Theory of Fields (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ.

1470: Press)

1471: 

1472: \noindent

1473: Weinberg, S. 1980, Phys. Lett. 91B, 51

1474: 

1475: \noindent

1476: Weisskopf, V.F. 1939, Phys. Rev. 56, 72

1477: 

1478: \noindent

1479: Wheeler, J.A. 1978, in Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Theory, 

1480: A. R. Marlow ed. (New York: Academic Press), p.9

1481: 

1482: \noindent

1483: Wheeler, J.A., \& Zurek, W.H. 1983, Quantum Theory and Measurement

1484: (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press)

1485: 

1486: \noindent

1487: Wigner, E. 1963, Ameri. J. Phys., 31, 6

1488: 

1489: \noindent

1490: Yang, C.N. 1987, in Schrodinger: Centenary Celebration of a Polymath

1491: 

1492: \noindent

1493: Yang, C.N., \& Lee, T.D. 1952, Phys. Rev. 87, 404

1494: 

1495: \noindent

1496: Zee, A. 2003, Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell (Princeton: Princeton

1497: Univ. Press)

1498: 

1499: \noindent

1500: Zhang, X. 1996, Astrophysical Journal, 457, 125

1501: 

1502: \noindent

1503: Zhang, X. 1998, Astrophysical Journal, 499, 98

1504: 

1505: \noindent

1506: Zhang, X. 1999, Astrophysical Journal, 518, 613

1507: 

1508: \noindent

1509: Zhang, X. 2003, invited review presented in the 2nd APCTP 

1510: workshop on astrophysics, Formation and Interaction of Galaxies,

1511: ed. H.M. Lee, Journal of Korean Astronomical Society, 36, 223, 2003

1512:                                                                                 

1513: \noindent

1514: Zhang, X. 2004,  invited talk presented

1515: in the international conference on Penetrating Bars through

1516: Masks of Cosmic Dust: Hubble Tuning Fork Strikes a New Note, 

1517: eds. D. Block et al., Astrophysics and Space Science, 319, 317

1518: 

1519: \noindent

1520: Zhang, X. 2005, Naval Research Lab memorandum report, NRL/MR/7210-05-8866

1521: 

1522: \noindent

1523: Zurek, W.H. 2002, Los Alamos Science, No. 27, p.2

1524: 

1525: \vfill

1526: \eject

1527: