Logic To Physics

Table of Contents


This website documents my efforts to derive the laws of physics from the principles of logic alone. This was once considered to be an unattainable pipe dream or at least an unrealistic goal. But recently I have been able to describe this effort with math. And now it's a matter of whether there is a mistake in the mathematics. The main document is given here.

To understand the math it would be helpful to at least know first semester integral calculus and first semester propositional logic. These subjects might even have been studied in advanced courses in some high-schools. It might also be helpful to have some experience with probability distributions. But I give a very brief introduction to these concepts in the article as a reminder.

It's possible that scientists may consider this effort to be a subject of philosophy or math. And mathematicians may consider it a matter of physics. But this effort does not discuss at length the philosophical issues, nor is it highly mathematical. I think it belongs in the realm of physics since it is an effort to completely justify the laws of physics. The usual paradigm of science is to confirm everything with experiment. But we are now at a place in physics where it would require unobtainable energies to directly confirm our theories with experiment. So we are forced to rely more heavily on the internal logical consistency of a theory as proof of its validity. Thus my efforts start with the definition of consistency and goes on to develop the wave function of quantum mechanics and quantum field theory; it reveals the origin of the symmetries of the Standard Model and proposes methods of extending the field. I consider it possible at this point that this effort has the potential of explaining everything, and it might actually be a theory of everything. This is a work in progress, and it is expected to grow as I gain insight.

It seems to me that the math is relatively simple, and the concepts developed here are quite standard. I challenge anyone to point out any speculative presumptions in this work. Since I'm not affiliated with any university and this has been an independent research effort, I would appreciated your scrutiny, and any suggestions on content or presentation will be taken seriously. Maybe you could share this website with your teachers and professors to see if they can find any problems with it. Thank you.

Main article