Theoretical analysis demonstrates deterministic mathematical modeling over probabilistic methods in quantum physics, suggesting improved efficiency in nanoparticle research.
This is the fourth article of one group of four about the first presentation of The Essential Theory of Everything, of the Universe - ETE-U. We will build a scenario to illustrate the differences between subjective/probabilistic and objective / mathematical/numerical propositions. We will highlight the errors found in science, especially in Quantum Physics. We present the reasons that lead to the impediment of nature being probabilistic. We make an analogy with the science of innovation, which has a failure rate of 97% of ideas due to the dependence on guesswork and probabilities. Quantum physics makes the same mistake by replacing traditional physics (mathematics) with a bias, a probabilistic shortcut that blocks its enrichment. Probabilistic environments are abundant in assumptions, guesses, divergences, inefficiencies, skating in the advance of knowledge, and fostering a frequent return to the beginning. But in mathematical/logical environments, logical/numerical convergence contributes with " effectiveness that generates greater efficiency," allowing continuous development, generation after generation, creating the "silver bullet" whose existence borders on the impossible in the environments of assumptions and opinions. At the end, we show that the Equation of the Universe is an excellent opportunity for nanoparticle physics to return from where it should never have left. In the same way, starting a trajectory based on the PEE of the exact sciences would be much more efficient for the science of innovation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rui Santo (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: