Is reality classical?

This post is a reflection of recent analysis of Marco Frasca named "Ballentine and the decoherence program", where he disputes the question of "environmental decoherence".

Aether Wave Theory interprets a reality by nested density fluctuations of hypothetical Boltzmann gas, i.e. the Aether. It's a neoclassical local view consistent with neighboring reality, from which follows, when sighting along time dimension into past (cosmic scale) or future (Planck scale) a relativity or quantum mechanics phenomena will emerge. General relativity perspective has its Aether background in correspondence of Einstein's field equation and thermodynamic state equation ΔQ=TdS , which was proven by T.A. Jacobson. For example, AWT intepretes a 1st Newton inertia law and relativistic motion along geodesics in gravity field as a sort of diffusion and gravitational lensing as an optical lensing phenomena.



In dual way, quantum mechanics perspective has its background in Thomas-Fermi approximation, which recovers the semi-classical limit for large QM systems. Hamilton–Jacobi equations for this Hamiltonian are then the same as the geodesics on the Riemann manifold, Hamiltonian flow can be intepreted as a diffusive motion along geodesics as well. In accordance with this, most of quantum mechanics phenomena (like the result of double slit experiment) can be intepreted easily by semi-classical models by AWT, quantum entanglement is no exception.



What we know already, every combination of these two theories (the string theory and quantum gravity theory in particular) leads to landscape of infinite number of solutions, thus reflecting insintric randomness of Aether reality anyway. No relativity, no quantum mechanics based on empirically ad-hoced postulates has it's own intersubjectivelly accepted interpretation with exception of famous dictum “Shut up and calculate” (attributed to Feynman by mistake probably), which basically replaces the understanding of reality by its numeric regression. Does it mean, reality is non-classical, just because it can be described in distant and rare cases by two (or more) mutually inconsistent boundary theories too? Should we ignore paralellistic and holistic approach to reality understanding just because multicomponent systems cannot be handled by consecutive logics of formal math well? Should we replace the local description or reality by its description from distant past or future perspective? Is principal limitation of formal language supposed to become a crucial problem in general understanding? Is the transversal wave motion along single time arrow the only way of information spreading?

Well, I don't think so - nevertheless this question still has a great significance for formally thinking individuals, who doesn't care about consistent description of reality, until it doesn't fit their pet theory. What they're afraiding for is their social credit and further grant support of their theories like ultra-conservative proponents of Holy Church of medieval era. This is by my opinion the main problem of mainstream science with Aether concept as a whole. For the purpose of such people, lack of general & transparent understanding of reality is highly welcomed on background - every deeper understanding may reveal their theories ad-hoced naively and inconsistent.

Such approach is nothing very new in human history, indeed. Scientists are behaving like priests or medicinmanns of modern era from this perspective - adherence on their incomprehensible formal models brings them meritocracy, social respect, safe jobs separated from public control and helps them survive more easily in human society. As the result, contemporary learning system has many connections to novitiate of sectarian communities - high school novices are purposely trained in formal thinking with minimal connection to underlying physical models and they're not allowed to publish, until they don't pass various tests of "compatibility in thinking".

Please note, that this stance is of emergent nature: with exception of rare individuals most of scientists are people, who are "rather" opened further progress in "another" areas, at least proclamativelly. But their competitive behavior and bias toward formal description of reality cumulates through society, thus making a driving force, which becomes a solid brake of the further understanding at large scales. For those, who knows, how slowly magnetic field penetrates the superconductor (Meissner-Ochsenfeld effect) may be understandable, why I consider every rigid sectarian community a boson condensate and/or black hole, as being observed/interacted from outside.

William James: "A great many people think they're thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."