Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Proposed framework integrates quantum mechanics and relativity, highlighting geometric interpretations and implications.
We propose an ontological framework for the formalism of quantum mechanics and special relativity, based on three principles: Conciliation (the projective work of bringing multiple perspectives into a single coherent state), Fluidity (the irreversible, anti-quantized continuity of process, identified with Time), and Eversion (an operator, denoted IW, which turns a structure inside out, generating a boundary between an inner and an outer domain). The framework yields several formal correspondences. The successive application of the Eversion operator generates the standard hierarchy of normed division algebras: ℝ → ℂ ≅ Mat(2 × 2, ℝ) → ℍ ≅ Mat(2 × 2, ℂ) (along the XY axis) and ℝ → ℂ → 𝕆 ≅ Mat(2 × 2 × 2, ℝ) (along the Z axis). The first branch is identified with the gauge groups U(1) and SU(2) of the electromagnetic and weak interactions; the second branch with SU(3) of the strong interaction, in which the multiplication law of the Fano plane appears naturally as a consequence of the rank-3 tensor structure (and explains the loss of associativity for octonions). On this basis SU(3) is more accurately represented as Mat(2 × 2 × 2, ℝ) than as Mat(8 × 8). In the macroscopic limit the framework reproduces the Minkowski metric and the Lorentz transformations through quaternionic representation of spacetime, with the coefficient c interpreted as the rate of curvature of the Eversion of Time into Space. Mass acquires the form m² = T² − X². Dark matter and dark energy are interpreted as artifacts of incomplete Eversion of Matter and Space respectively. Spin ½, quantum entanglement, and the spherical wavefront of a photon receive natural geometric descriptions as projections of inner Eversion structures into observable space. The framework is offered as a working ontology — a language in which the existing formalism of quantum mechanics becomes meaningful, and in which it extends naturally to a broader class of phenomena involving Conciliation between multiple perspectives.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stanislav Ivanov (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: