01
Presently there is disconnect between our understanding of the probabilistic world of quantum mechanics and the classical one of causality because it can predict with precision the future position of an object while the other cannot.
However this may just be an illusion resulting from a lack of understanding of the quantum environment.
One of the fundament areas where this disconnect appears is in the probabilistic interpretation Schrödinger wave equation
However one could eliminate this disconnect if one could explain the causality of those probabilities in terms of a physical image based on the laws of classical physics similar to how we explain the causality of the movement of the planets around the sun in terms of a physical image of a curvature in spacetime.
Granted this will not change the fact that one cannot use quantum mechanics to make precise predictions of future events but it would give us a physical reason why we cannot in terms of our classical understanding of causality.
One way of accomplishing this would be look at the physically observable properties of all quantum systems and determine if by applying the laws of causality in a classical environment one can explain the reason for the probabilities associated with Schrödinger’s equation.
For example in 1924 Louis de Broglie theorized that all quantum objects are physically composed of a wave as was verified by 1927 by Davisson and Germer) when he observed electrons diffracted by crystals.
However, the fact that no one has been able to physically connect the causality of those observable properties to the probabilities of all quantum systems does not change the fact that there must be one because if there wasn’t they could not interact with our environment to create the physically observable properties of the world upon which those probabilities are determined.
One reason for this failure may be due to the fact that those probability are related to the spatial not time dependent properties of the wave function.
If so one may be able to establish the connection by looking at it in terms of its spatial properties instead of the spacetime ones associated with Einstein’s theories.
Einstein gave us the ability to do this when defined the geometric properties of spacetime in terms of the constant velocity of light because that provided a method of converting a unit of time in a spacetime environment of unit of space in four *spatial* dimensions. Additionally because the velocity of light is constant he also defined a one to one quantitative and qualitative correspondence between his spacetime universe and one made up of four *spatial* dimensions.
The fact that one can use Einstein’s equations to qualitatively and quantitatively redefine the curvature in spacetime he associated with energy in terms of four *spatial* dimensions is one bases for assuming as was done in the article “Defining energy?” Nov 27, 2007 that all forms of energy can be derived in terms of a spatial displacement in a "surface" of a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
However doing so would have allowed Louis de Broglie to physically define the casualty of the quantum properties associated with Schrödinger equation in terms of a physical or spatial displacement in a "surface" of a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension as was done in the article "Why is energy/mass quantized?" Oct. 4, 2007.
Briefly, that article showed the quantized properties of energy/mass are the result of a resonant system formed by a matter "wave" on a "surface" of a threedimensional space manifold with respect to fourth "spatial" dimension. This is because it showed the four conditions required for resonance to occur in a threedimensional environment, an object, or substance with a natural frequency, a forcing function at the same frequency as the natural frequency, the lack of a damping frequency and the ability for the substance to oscillate spatial would occur in one made up of four.
The existence of four *spatial* dimensions would give a matter wave the ability to oscillate spatially on a "surface" between a third and fourth *spatial* dimension thereby fulfilling one of the requirements for classical resonance to occur.
These oscillations would be caused by an event such as the decay of a subatomic particle or the shifting of an electron in an atomic orbital. This would force the "surface" of a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension to oscillate with the frequency associated with the energy of that event.
However, the oscillations caused by such an event would serve as forcing function allowing a resonant system or "structure" to be established on a surface of a threedimensional space manifold.
Yet the classical laws of threedimensional space tell us the energy of resonant systems can only take on the discontinuous or discreet energies associated with their fundamental or harmonic of their fundamental frequency.
However, these are the similar to the quantum mechanical properties of energy/mass in that they can only take on the discontinuous or discreet energies associated with the formula E=hv where "E" equals the energy of a particle "h" equal Planck’s constant "v" equals the frequency of its wave component.
In other words Louis de Broglie would have been able to physicality connect the properties of his particle waves to the quantum mechanical properties of Schrödinger equation in terms of the discrete incremental energies associated with a resonant system in four *spatial* dimensions if he had assume space was composed of it instead of four dimensional spacetime.
Yet it also would have allowed him to define the physical boundaries of a quantum system in terms of the geometric properties of four *spatial* dimensions.
For example in classical physics, a point on the twodimensional surface of a piece of paper is confined to that surface. However, that surface can oscillate up or down with respect to threedimensional space.
Similarly an object occupying a volume of threedimensional space would be confined to it however, it could, similar to the surface of the paper oscillate “up” or “down” with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
The confinement of the “upward” and “downward” oscillations of a threedimension volume with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension is what defines the spatial boundaries associated with a particle in the article "Why is energy/mass quantized?" Oct. 4, 2007.
As mentioned earlier in the article “Defining energy?” Nov 27, 2007 showed all forms of energy can be derived in terms of a spatial displacement in a "surface" of a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
However assuming the energy associated with Louis de Broglie particle wave is result of a displacement in four *spatial* dimension instead of four dimensional spacetime as was done earlier would allow one to define a classical causality for quantum probabilities in terms the observable environment we inhabit.
Classical mechanics tell us that due to the continuous properties of waves the energy the article "Why is energy/mass quantized?" Oct. 4, 2007 associated with a quantum system would be distributed throughout the entire "surface" a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
For example Classical mechanics tells us the energy of a vibrating or oscillating ball on a rubber diaphragm would be disturbed over its entire surface while the magnitude of those vibrations would decrease as one move away from the focal point of the oscillations.
Similarly if the assumption that quantum properties of energy/mass are a result of vibrations or oscillations in a "surface" of threedimensional space is correct then classical mechanics tell us that those oscillations would be distributed over the entire "surface" threedimensional space while the magnitude of those vibrations would be greatest at the focal point of the oscillations and decreases as one moves away from it.
As mentioned earlier the article “Why is energy/mass quantized?” shown a quantum particle is a result of a resonant structure formed on the "surface" of a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
Yet Classical Wave Mechanics tells us resonance would most probably occur on the surface of the rubber sheet were the magnitude of the vibrations is greatest and would diminish as one move away from that point,
Similarly a particle would most probably be found were the magnitude of the vibrations in a "surface" of a threedimensional space manifold is greatest and would diminish as one move away from that point.
This shows that one can define the causality of the probabilities associated Schrödinger wave equation in terms of the laws of causality associated with our observable environment by redefining them in terms of four *spatial* dimensions.
In other words one can eliminate the disconnect between the probabilities associated his equation and a classical environment by defining their causality in terms of the laws of classical physics.
It should be remember Einstein’s genius allows us to choose to define a quantum system in either a spacetime environment or one consisting of four *spatial* dimension when he defined the geometry of spacetime in terms of the constant velocity of light. This interchangeability broadens the environment encompassed by his theories thereby giving us a new perspective on the probabilistic properties of a quantum environment and how they physically connected to our observable universe.
Later Jeff
Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2016
Ockham’s razor is the idea that, in trying to understand something, getting unnecessary information out of the way is the fastest way to the truth or to the best explanation.
For example Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity is based on the relative simple concept of a curvature in a spacetime metric. Granted the math required to determine the gravitational forces on an object can be very complicated and not easy for many to understand however understanding or visualizing how a curvature in spacetime can cause objects to accelerate is relative easy to do. This is because one can form a relatively simple physical image of it based on how objects such as a ball is accelerated on a curved two dimensional surface on the earth and them extrapolating that to a curvature in a spacetime metric.
However, even though in 1917, he added a cosmological constant to his equations which some fell would provide one of simplest mathematical explanations for Dark energy it is difficult for many to conceptually integrate it with the physical imagery that is provided by his theory.
Yet, this may be due to the fact that Einstein chose to define gravity in terms of time or a spacetime dimension while the accelerative forces of Dark Energy are related to the spatial properties of an expanding universe.
In other words, as Ockham pointed out the best way to understand it would be to eliminate time or the spacetime dimension from his general theory of gravity and replace it with spatial one because as was just mentioned our universe is not expanding through time dimension therefore it is not necessary to our understanding of its spatial expansion.
Einstein gave us the ability to do this he derived the physical properties of a gravity in a spacetime environment in terms mass and energy and the constant velocity of light because that provided a method of converting a unit of time in a spacetime environment with unit of space in four *spatial* dimensions. Additionally because the velocity of light is constant he also defined a one to one quantitative correspondence between his spacetime universe and one made up of four *spatial* dimensions.
A Discussion on General Relativity by Students of John Wheeler and Bob Dicke 
This fact that one can use Einstein’s theories to qualitatively and quantitatively derive the spatial properties of energy in a spacetime universe in terms of four *spatial* dimensions is one the bases of assuming as was done in the article “Defining energy” Nov 27, 2007 that all forms of energy can be derived in terms of a spatial displacement in a “surface” of a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
In other words one can not only use Einstein’s equations to quantitatively and qualitatively derive how energy interacts with time in a spacetime dimension but also how it would interact with its spatial equivalent in four spatial dimensions.
We know from the study of thermodynamics that energy flows from areas of high to ones with low density very similar to how water flows form an elevated or “high density” point to a lower one.
For example if the walls of an above ground pool filled with water collapse the elevated twodimensional surface of the water will flow or expand and accelerate outward towards the threedimensional environment sounding it.
Yet we know from observations of the cosmic background radiation that presently our threedimensional universe has an average energy component equal to about 3.7 degrees Kelvin.
However this means that according to concepts developed in the article “Defining energy” (mentioned earlier) the threedimensional “surface” of our universe which has an average energy component of 3.7 degree Kelvin would be elevated with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
Similarly if the “surface” of a threedimensional manifold was elevated with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension as Einstein tell us as it would be if one redefined his spacetime universe in terms of four spatial dimension then it would be accelerated outward for the same reason as how the water in a pool whose sides had collapsed.
In other words one qualitatively understand the casually of the accelerated expansion of our universe in term of the physical image of water accelerating out of collapsed pool.
Some may feel that this is an over simplification of what appears on the surface to be a rather complex phenomena such as Dark Energy but is no more simplistic that the one use to help us understand how gravity works in a spacetime environment. Granted the math behind this concept may be complex and difficult to understand as it is with the gravitational curvature in spacetime however that does not mean that we cannot use it to understand its causality.
It should be remember that Einstein’s genius and the symmetry of his mathematics allows us to choose whether to define the forces associated with gravity and dark energy in either four *spatial* dimensions or four dimensional spacetime.
Later Jeff
Copyright 2016 Jeffrey O’Callaghan
Anthology of 
The Reality of the Fourth Spatial Dimension Paperback $9.77 Ebook $6.24 
The Imagineer’s


The Imagineer’s

The Imagineer’s Chronicles Vol. 4 — 2013 Paperback $13.29 Ebook $7.99 
The Imagineer’s 

The Imagineer’s

The Imagineer’s 
