See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/342170028

Newtonian Quantum Mechanics

Preprint · June 2020

CITATIONS READS
0 567

1 author:

Ashkan Memarian
N.A.
4 PUBLICATIONS   17 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Newtonian Quantum Mechanics View project

Permutation Decomposition View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ashkan Memarian on 18 April 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Newtonian Quantum Mechanics and Evidence for String Theory

Ashkan Memarian

April 17, 2022

Abstract

Newton’s first law will be considered with a modification being a small Brownian motion added to

the trajectory of a particle. This is shown to reproduce the Schrödinger equation and hence account for

all (classic) quantum mechanical phenomena observed. The origin of this Brownian motion is explained

to effectively be a classical string theory. Several points are subsequently discussed.

1 Theory

As for the arithmetic of this theory, a computer simulation like (forward scheme) calculation is proposed,

each step of which consists of a classical mechanical progress plus a random number added to the position or

momentum of a particle. This physically originates from a modification of the first law being an addition of

a small Brownian motion to the conservation of momentum. This postulate leads to the two characteristic

behaviour of a quantum particle, namely that its corresponding wavefunction diffuses and on longer scales

and on average measurements classical behaviour is seen. So this corresponds to the Schrödinger equation

itself. As a result this theory is equivalent to the quantum theory and practically can be thought of another

way of quantizing a classical system. For instance any classical field theory upon addition of a random step

to its time evolution gives its quantum theory. As a side note, this is reminiscent of the underlying fluid in

Bohmian mechanics.

Much like it should be the case in quantum mechanics, an initial state is determined by the classical

state of the ensemble. Otherwise (by just having the probabilities), expressing the same probability in bases

differing at two point by two different phases yields different time evolution for an intermediate point. Note

that this fixes the initial phases: probabilities fix the magnitude and (average) velocities fix the phases (as

their gradient give velocities). Hence, diffusion theory is equivalent to quantum mechanics as it describes

both the evolution of the amplitudes and the evolution of velocities exactly the same as quantum mechanics.

1
 To even further spell out the details, if one considers times t and t+∆t, then at each time the probabilities

determine the amplitude and the average velocity (at a small interval) determines the phases. The time

evolution between these two times is a continuous change from the first values to the second values. In

diffusion theory too, the time evolution of the (average) velocity is classical and a diffusion is added to the

evolution of the amplitudes as a result of classical motion. So all that remains is to show that the theories

agree to the first order (in time).

First and second order calculations give:

|ψ(∆t)|2 = |ψ0 |2 + 2~∆tIm(ψ0 ∇ψ0∗ ) + ~2 ∆t2 |∇ψ0 |2 + 2~2 ∆t2 V Re(ψ0 ∇ψ0∗ ) + ~2 ∆t2 V 2 |ψ0 |2 (1)

The first and the second term constitute the first law. This is so since the derivative of the phase, when

writing the wave-function for a fixed time as exp(iθ(r))A(r), appears in the second term (as mentioned

above this derivative gives the classical velocity of the ensemble). This term when studied further has both

free motion and diffusive free motion in it. The rest of the terms have diffusion as well as the forces in them,

describing the second law and when having diffusion. And they are smaller in order of magnitude.

If we assume the equivalence of the one particle Schrödinger’s equation with a two (or multi) particle

bosonic system for instance, as having the same physics dictates, then the equivalence with a diffusion

theoretical model becomes more clear. In both theories, we have an ensemble of particles that diffuse and

move classically, as for localized states the equivalence is nearly trivial.

2 Hypotheses About the Origins

Further, the origin of the theory, i.e. the Brownian motion, is proposed to be one or a combination of

the following:

• String Theory: temporary transfer of momentum from other dimension (via interacting string vibra-

tions, possibly rotating vibrations or supersymmetric interactions with other dimensions. Note that

here the extra dimensions are not assumed necessarily small as they are no longer invisible). Note that

quantum corrections to calculated physical constants (e.g. Bohr radius) could contain information

about the extra dimensions (number of them for instance). In such systems, the brownian motion gets

smaller with the increase in the mass of a string and hence the diffusion is inversely proportional to

the mass.

• Mach Principle (Uncertainty) Like Origins: Interpreting a theory with respect to measuring devices

could have fundamental manifestations. For example fundamental inability in measuring a position or

momentum fast enough might imply that any theory describing it will have some random addition of

2
 a value to position or momentum. What is the smallest square that can be measured? In this sense,

knowing more about the position of a particle, i.e. more correlation to the position of other particles,

leads to less diffusion. If this be taken as the definition of mass (say number of constituent particles),

then diffusion is inversely proportional to mass, much like in the Schrödinger’s equation. This could

be along the lines of information theoretic look at this question.

• Backwards Time Progress: A Progress in backwards in time is independent of the progress in forwards

in time, a collision of a particle traveling forward in time with a particle backwards in time results

in their switching. Due to not having set the backwards in time condition, all such trajectories exist

implying that the particle has small Brownian motion type adjustments to its trajectories. If one

further considers the possibility of switching with other kinds of particles conserving the spin and

momenta (much like in scattering), then one could potentially obtain a theory in which diffusion is

inversely proportional to mass. This is also similar to the Schrödinger’s equation and to quantum

theory.

• Crystals: See below.

Despite being different in nature, at first glance at least, all these origins seem to be effectively string

theoretical at the quantum scale. That is, they can be modelled by string theory effectively.

3 Towards a Proof

For a proof at the theoretical physical level see the section below on second quantization and Bell’s

theorem. For a more mathematical physical proof, the following is proposed:

Consider an infinite square well. The walls, in the diffusion model, push the atoms near them towards the

centre. Hence all of the diffusion velocity that was originally towards the outside of the well will be redirected

towards the centre, causing the ensemble to pile up in the middle (for the lower energies). Similarly one can

obtain higher modes. Same thing in quantum mechanics happens: the sinusoidal modes of an infinite well.

For free states, consider taking the length of the well to be larger and larger. This creates more and more

of an unchanging mode in a diffusion equation due to the frequency decreasing, similar to a free propagating

particle in quantum mechanics.

For an arbitrary potential, consider approximating it by step functions. Then at each step, one can

consider high (Fourier) modes with support just on the step, starting from a large n, so that the situation

resembles that of the second previous and previous paragraph. That this basis still works follows from Stone-

Weierstrass theorem, where one solves for a piece-wise straight and average approximation to a function by

3
a set of n basis functions. This basis then shows similarity (or equivalence even) to a quantum mechanical

solution. I.e. the Green’s function in the two theories are very similar. This should give the proof when one

takes the limit etc.

A more technical issue here is that the basis chosen above vanishes at the boundaries of the steps, and

hence so will any solution expressed in terms of them. However, if we focus on sub-intervals slightly away

these boundaries, we still see the equivalence for (nearly?) all boundary conditions. A boundary can be

treated as a point excitation whose equivalence to quantum mechanics is trivial (diffusion of an excitation).

On an even more technical level, this would be claiming that any functions can be turned into one that

vanishes on slightly farther away boundary points analytically. But as just said and as the system can be

solved for any boundary condition near the centre in terms of the vanishing at the boundaries modes, this is

only intuitive. Any derivative for instance only fixes the (two) nearby points. So what was proposed really

shows the equivalence of the two theories (diffusion mechanics and quantum mechanics) for any system.

To see the equivalence for stationary states, consider an ensemble in the ground state of an infinite

(square) well for instance. Here the probability density is sin2 (x) and the average velocity is sin(2x). This

gives, for a diffusing system, a flow (due to velocity) of cos(2x) as well as a diffusion (proportional to the

gradient) of the form cos(2x), cancelling the flow and hence leading to a stationary state.

4 Miscellaneous Facts about Quantum Mechanics and This The-

ory

If one measures a quantity in progression in time, there is otherwise no reason that the calculated probability

converges to any number.

Instead of choosing a stationary basis for a generic solution of the Schröodinger’s equation, one can consider

a basis transition rate between each two of the functions are calculable and find the sum at the end. A

simple way of finding such a basis is by starting out, for finite systems, with an arbitrary set of basis vectors.

Then as the Schrödinger equation is mostly periodic, i.e. for which there exists an arbitrarily close system

(with rational energies) whose time evolution is periodic, writing the initial state in this second system will

give a desired bases. This would be by simply dividing a period into N intervals and letting the evolved

system at each point be a basis. Then any sum of these will also have known transition rates. For instance

if we add the second and the third one, every six segments will be the new period.

This theory implies a quantum theory of any classical theory (gravity, chemistry, condensed matter, QCD,

...).

In path integration formulation of quantum mechanics, the continuity of path simply originates from the

4
diffusion of an x-basis vector into others during small time intervals. This illuminates the physics, as well

as the mathematics, of any area based on path integration formulation of quantum mechanics and presents

a solid footing (mass gap?).

Aside from a semi-classical approximation, one can think of a semi-quantum approximation meaning we

have a superposition of potentials (and not a sum of them).

Unruh Effect is simply different time dilations at different positions (due to acceleration of the observer) of

the ground state of a particle in a box, taking a single frequency to a superposition of frequencies, hence a

multi-particle state.

A spin can be (mostly) measured by considering a setup similar to a Stern-Gerloch experiment only with a

divergence of a magnetic field for the magnets (arranging several magnets on a circle). This supports the idea

above and implies that classical notions do exist in the quantum regime as well. Note that this can have major

impacts on quantum communication. To see this, recall that a Schrödinger operator (qualitatively speaking),

causes a wavefunction to diffuse and increase like the potential for short times. In such experiments, the set

up is such that the diffusion of spin is negligible and hence there is only increase like the potential for a step

time interval (the interaction term is proportional to B.µ). Repeated application of this evolution gives the

answer. This is an example of a semi-quantum approximation mentioned earlier. In the discrete version of

this, one obtains more than two points in contrast to an Stern-Gerlock experiment where one has two. Note

that in the semi-classical approximation of such experiment, one still gets two points (corresponding to the

vector sum of the fields)1 .

If we consider two subsystems of a system, then a good question is regarding the appropriate way of

expressing them. Can we, for instance, simply write a sum of two wave-functions? We need to have the

statistics work out correctly: the probabilities should be the sum of the two corresponding probabilities for

the two subsystems (and not the amplitudes) and also the average velocity should be the (weighted) average

of the velocities. As a result, a sum of two wave-functions will not work. This seems to be an inherent

limitation of this formalism (quantum mechanics). Unless the two systems have classical velocities s.t. their

phases differ by a half pi, doing so does not seem possible.

If we consider part of a sine function as a wavefunction, the Fourier coefficients of this bit can be found (to

be non-zero). Hence according to quantum mechanics, if we look at a part of an ensemble of momentum

states, then we still see a range of velocities for a particle. This means that a momentum state is only on

average a momentum state and on larger (than the wavelength considered) scales.

5 Bell’s Theorem, Second Quantization and Quantum Theory

1 This was found together with Dr. Gwendolyn A. Bailey in 2011.

5
 This theory in itself does not have any parametrization (hidden variable description) so the Bell’s theorem

does not apply. The String Theoretical origin however does have a parametrization. The reason Bell’s

theorem does not apply in this case is that the probabilities coming from it do not converge in quantum

scales at least.

Considering second quantization in condensed matter physics, a similar phenomena to this theory is

observed. The first quantization (quantization of the electrons and the nuclei) is averaged out (Ehrenfest’s

theorem applied to the crystal) in the lattice but certain presumably classical physical phenomena (phonons

for instance) exhibit quantum behaviour (diffusion of an excitation or exchange between modes in some

bases). This behaviour is due to the lattice having internal degrees of freedom which mimic the random step

in this theory. Hence, quantum theory can be summarized as the interaction of two physics (lattice bases

modes and the lattice modes itself in this case). This implies for instance that stationary states occur when

the two physics interact coherently.

If one considers a larger setting (cosmological) and looks at the origins in this setting, one might be

able to obtain a classical statistical theory that violates the Bell’s theorem. However, such scales do not

have quantum mechanics in them so there actually is no contradiction. When there is classical mechanics

and hence probability density (i.e. for such time scales), there is no quantum mechanics as Bell’s theorems

predict. And when there is quantum mechanics, these probability densities do not exist. This is different

from not having set the initial conditions completely as mentioned above about string theory. Also could

be that such theories do not have probability densities due to their nature at all. This means if we look at a

probability density for such a model, it never converges. That mathematically such a thing is possible can

be seen by considering a sequence of zeros and ones for which the probability of finding a 1 in the first n

digits does not converge. To create such a number, assume a random initial (binary) number with n digits,

then find the probability, then add enough digits so that the probability does not converge to the previously

calculated probability, then iterate.

6 Crystals

Another possibility, besides the three that were mentioned, is that, instead of a string with large momentum

in farther away sections of a multi-D world, behind this world is a crystalline structure. This, much like

the phonons and second quantization, could lead to quantum mechanics. I.e. any elementary particle is an

excitation from a (potentially multi-dimensional) crystal and the observed world consists of certain stable

modes in this crystal. This is to say any point has internal degrees of freedom. However much such a picture

resembles string theory, it is different from it in that there are no free strings traveling around. Further,

much like the other origins, this theory also has diffusion inverse to the mass of the excitation.

If one assumes a multi-dimensional crystal, then many-world interpretation might emerge. The (mostly)

6
periodic nature of (stable) solutions in condensed matter studies can lead to such physics, when going along

a certain direction perpendicular to this world.

7 Momentum Transfer in String Theory and Spheres

If we had a sphere instead of a string (more precisely the equivalent of a sphere in 3-D in a multi-D

world), then momentum could transfer from a direction to another. Note that in a string this is not possible.

Is it possible to have stable spherical sheets where the stability comes from vibration modes on the sphere

(say going round)? What would the interaction of two spheres cause? Would a supersymmetric interaction

of two bosonic modes on this sphere with transfer of momentum from a dimension to another be possible

here? This would (?) effectively be having invariance under infinitesimal supersymmetry transformations

that have sums over non-equal indices.

8 A little Quantum Theory

The up and down in a Stern-Gerloch experiment on atoms is the result of the brownian motion causing

an averaging of the spin such that only the clockwise or counter-clockwise nature of the spin is seen at the

end. Further, the same experiment on elementary particles suggests existence of internal degrees of freedom

for them. Quantization of energy would be, much like in a classical crystal (with say a Bohr model for the

basis), a resonance phenomena. Question regarding the vacuum such as Unruh effect and Aharonov-Bohm

effect are be due to occasional existence of particles in the lowest energy states.

9 Future Direction

9.1 One and Two Body Problems

One body problem was covered earlier. The quantum particle diffuses in position and on average follows

a classical trajectory. Two body problem is in essence the same only the classical trajectory (force) is

varying in time and is the average force atom one experiences as a classical interaction with atom two as

well as other classical potentials. This could be potentially studied using the Hamiltonian formalism and

the Poisson brackets.

7
9.2 N-body Problem

This is to say that brownian motion (diffusion) with boundaries implies the Schrödinger’s equation.

Further, the Poisson bracket of any two classical variables that are functions of position (or momentum)

that was originally zero is nonzero in this theory (due to small extra brownian motions that do not necessarily

cancel). This is similar to canonical quantization. Note that here the derivatives are taken with respect to

the classical (without the brownian motion) phase space parameters. For one thing the brownian motion

does not have a parametrization and so a derivative with respect to it is meaningless (e.g. the second

quantization or string theoretical models).

The evolution of a system of N particles could be studied using the equation Dt f = ∂t f + {H , f } for

f specifying the positions of the N particles and the new Diffusion commutator will be used. This will be

then considered to extract the time evolution of the probability of finding a single particle at a given point.

Besides showing the equivalence of this theory to quantum mechanics (see also the next paragraph), this

can be used to understand the inner workings of quantum mechanics better.

Another issue that could be considered is the probability that a particle takes a certain path in this

theory. To this end, a small line segment can be considered first. Certainly, having a potential increases

the probability of the particle taking a path that has a larger inner product with the direction of the force.

Assuming a small (in the standard deviation) Gaussian for example for an initial probability density, the

time evolution for this theory is a diffusion (this is known in the probability theory) such that the expected

value (average) moves classically and according to classical mechanics (from kinematic arguments). Hence,

one finds a so called propagator exactly that of the corresponding one in path integration. This is what is

meant by the two characteristics of a quantum particle in section 1. Besides showing the validity of this

theory, this also shows why only continuous paths need be included in path integration. The Laplacian in

the hamiltonian is one of the two pieces describing the time evolution, the other being the classical potential.

Neither of these creates discontinuity.

9.3 Origins

The origins can also be examined more closely for the accuracy of the claims. Computer simulations

of each origin looks feasible. Further comparison with the existing knowledge in these fields should be

achievable.

10 On an Aside: General Relativity and Cosmology

In short, curvature of space in longer scales could be due to the inner structure of the origins. For

8
instance, considering extra dimensions, the inner structures of these dimensions could dictate the local

curvature. Dark matter in this sense is an ordering of the cosmos based on the inner extra dimensional

structures, the more similar they are the closer in space the regions. This could also have implications for

constancy of the speed of light. I.e. the Planck’s constant could vary from a location to another.

11 A (Mathematical) Identity

Creating a grid instead of R2 , in order to find the |hy, t = T | exp(−iH T )|x, t = 0i|2 , both in quantum

mechanics (path integration) and in this theory, the time interval T can be split to small intervals ∆.

Subsequently the answer is created by asking, given the continuity of paths (mentioned earlier), what points

can leak into |x, t = ∆i from |x0 , t = 0i and what is, upon measurement, the probability of finding them.

This so far in only a question in probability theory. Both quantum mechanically and using this theory, the

answer can be found and are equal as explained earlier. This can be carried out so that the entire grid is

filled and the answer to the question is the sum of the probabilities of paths that lead to |y, t = T i, each

being a product of the probabilities of the line segments that create it.
P
However, if the formalism of path integration is carried out, one ends up with the answer | paths exp(iθpath )∗

Ppath |2 where Ppath is the probability of taking the path. More explicitly, and initially, when finding the
p

time evolution of an approximation to the delta function that is real (i.e. has zero imaginary part), a small

time evolution of it might create an imaginary part: (f (x) + i ∗ 0) →− exp(−iHt) (f 0 (x) + i ∗ g(x)). And the

diffusion causes leakage to the neigbours. This is equal to a sum of three approximations to three delta
P3
functions, two corresponding to diffusions from the left and the right:( j=1 fj,normal (x) + i ∗ gj,normal (x)).

To find the inner product with another approximation to the delta function, in order to find the propagator

in path integration, one then obtains three inner products. In each case the evolved terms can be rotated

to assume orientation along the real axis while obtaining an overall phase. So the original time evolved
P3 0
approximation to the step function will look like: j=1 exp(iθj )(fj,normal + i ∗ 0). Carrying as such in

subsequent steps, each path will obtain an overall phase. Note that since the magnitude of the propagator

is equal to the square root of the (derived) diffusion probability, the probability of each path is merely the

square root of the product of the probabilities of each constituent line segment of the path. By derived here

is meant derived from the classical potential. This is to say that the phase of the line segments of the path

vanish when finding the probability of a given path.

These two approaches (path integration and finding the probability of a path as described in the pre-

vious paragraph and summing over the possible paths) should give the equal final answer. So one finds

| paths exp(iθpath ) ∗ Ppath |2 = path Ppath . This is interesting as the right hand side is real (zero imag-
P p P

inary part). Another way to see this is to note that in the left hand side, the cross terms will have an

9
imaginary part only as they each appear on each side (the ket and the bra) so their sum vanishes as the

magnitude is real. It might be interesting to look at what happens here explicitly (how does one find the

negative of the product of the two paths and which paths correspond to it).

One might ask what happened to the complex numbers. They are used for normalization mostly and for

finding a closed form of the equations and answers that is normalized all the time (i.e. one that is classically

correct). If one takes the Laplacian of the Schrödinger equation and also its time derivative separately for

instance, one can replace the time derivative of the Laplacian of the imaginary part that describes the second

time evolution of the real part with a fourth degree derivative of the real part and obtain an all together

real equation. It looks like a diffusion equation applied twice in a sense. So the complex numbers are not

necessary. However, in practice, if one was to carry out the procedure in the beginning of this section, the

difficulty (if possible at all) in doing so would justify the use of complex numbers (and Fourier analysis)

instead.

12 Historical Notes

There might have been theories that resemble this theory quite a lot (the Bohmian theory?). However, a

common objection to them is that the Bell’s inequalities would require non-locality in them. At the time

such theories were being created, the extra dimensional theories (among other origins) were at their birth

and so having a classical (or hidden variable) theory that does not have probabilities similar to how they

do not was not possible.

Another historical note is that black body radiation is a classical effect resembling quantum effects,

i.e. at a larger scale than the atomic physics. So Einsteins’ discovery, though describing quantum theory

correctly, was a classical phenomena.

13 AdS-CFT Correspondence

Very crudely speaking, a weak version of this can be seen in AdS-CFT correspondence as well: the (average)

string theory produces a quantum theory on a lower dimensional space. Despite the numerical values having

been verified in the limit of large number of particles and only for certain expection values, it is certainly

an early example of such phenomena.

A (quantized) string theory is, according to the first origin of this (diffusion) theory, a theory of averaged

(over internal dimensions) string excitations, that is a (larger dimensional and classical) string theory. When

looking at a cross section of the theory, much like in second quantization, one has to obtain another quantum

theory, the effect of the extra dimensions being the state evolving back and forth between different normal

modes of the lower dimensional theory. The AdS-CFT correspondence provides an example of this.

10
14 Quantum Mechanics and Diffusion Mechanics

For free propagation the equivalence can be seen by choosing a sufficiently symmetric lattice and ap-

propriate diffusion length. Note that here all paths should have the same length. For slow potentials, this

still holds. An important question is the cases similar to atomic potentials where the effects of the potential

and the brownian motion (or quantum diffusion of the amplitudes) are comparable. The question is how

does the product of amplitudes in the final answer from path integration for two different paths vanishes

(for correct choice of diffusion length). A potential contributor to the answer is that in the presence of a

potential, the propagation times should be equal (which does not necessarily imply the same lengths for

paths).

15 Implications about Decoherece

This theory (diffusion theory) implies two facts about Decoherence:

• Anderson localization might give an insight into how decoherence happens. This is when there is no

diffusion in a lattice despite the presence of a potential.

• Bell’s theorem imply that, given diffusion theory, whenever (for time scales for which) we have a

probability density the quantum nature of the problem vanishes.

Further, considering the string theoretical origin (effectively or not), it is tempting to think whether or

not string geometry and compactness of extra dimensions in string theory that leads to non-existence of

strings at larger scales have something to do with non-existence of diffusion and decoherence (i.e. not having

any quantum fluctuation). This would be considering classical scales and saying that extra dimensions are

small enough that no quantum nature exists at these larger scales.

Even Further, as there is no diffusion at other length scales, this might single out string theory as the

only valid candidate for the origin of diffusion.

16 Experimental Section

• If more diffusion near a surface is found, then it could mean that the extra dimensional physics near

the surface is different from those farther away, though the 3-D physics is the same (just void).

11
 • If the backwards time origin holds, then it might be possible to create a current by doing experiments

after a measurement is done in order to create more potential for say a velocity.

• Is there uncertainty principle in the cosmological scale as well? What is the difference of the physics

to atomic physics?

• Can the diffusion be decomposed into any set of modes? If so, then the crystalline origin might explain

the modes. Cosmological red shift also could be due to any of the above mentioned origins.

• As various diffusion models give the same average numbers, some good experiments are those that

aim to measure non-average behaviour. For instance, different diffusion rate functions as a function

of distance all give the same average diffusion (by having different constants) but those that allow

diffusion to farther away points (say an inverse model versus a quadratic inverse model) give different

variances as well as different short time behaviour. More specifically, if the diffusion is due a string for

instance, all of the diffusion will be in one direction (say due to a slightly faster than average motion)

initially, then when the string oscillates back it will be along another direction (i.e. due to slightly

slower than average motion) etc.

17 A Rational Line of Thought

In order to follow the above mentioned note better, the following might be helpful: Statistics exists in

all quantum mechanical phenomena and implies that the quantum world is not all together different from

the classical world. Further, that, as mentioned in the notes on quantum mechanics section, spin can be

measured implies that even in the quantum mechanical regime, classical notions still exist. In addition to

these, atomic physics for instance, by measurements of molecular spins that are in essence mere movement of

rigid bodies that diffuse in position, verifies such a view. So the theory above proves only natural. A theory

that is mostly classical yet explains major quantum theoretical phenomena at a axiomatic level, namely

existence of diffusion. As there are not many (other than string theory) theories at such scales, the origins

(all mostly effectively classical string theories) and string theory itself comes to mind. Condensed matter

and in particular quantum field theoretical approximations to an averaged out crystal, known as second

quantization, verifies this still further. Also known, to the knowledge of the author, is that any classical

theory with a non-vanishing Poisson bracket is in essence a quantum theory. So any randomness that does

not cancel would suffice as a candidate. These all point out towards the validity of this theory from the

point of view of a physicist.

12

View publication stats