Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM) Challenges Quantum Claims of Negative Time and Probabilistic Photon Behaviour:

July 22, 2025

The analysed document, "Negative Time and Photon Behaviour: An ECM-Based Critique of Quantum Probabilistic Claims," primarily discusses the concept of "negative time" and the probabilistic behaviour of photons as claimed by some quantum theories. It then critiques these claims from the perspective of Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM). 

Here's a breakdown of the analysis:

1. The Claim of Negative Time:

Stuart Knaki references a discovery by Mohammad Qusir Rather and Aephraim Steinberg from the University of Toronto, who reportedly observed the "first evidence of negative time".

This observation suggests that photons exhibit a "peculiar curly or frizzy structure" and that their behaviour is governed by probabilistic principles, aligning with quantum mechanics where outcomes are subject to chance.

In the quantum mechanical context, negative time is interpreted as scenarios where time seems to move backward, challenging the conventional understanding of temporal flow.

Later, it's specified that these quantum-level claims, particularly from Aephraim Steinberg and his colleagues, involved photons interacting with ultracold rubidium atoms, where reemission appeared to occur before absorption, suggesting "negative dwell time". Popular science outlets have interpreted this as evidence challenging the unidirectional arrow of time.

2. Conventional Understanding of Time:

Conventionally, time is defined as "the indefinite continued progress of existence and events in the past, present, and future regarded as a whole".

A refined conventional definition describes time as "the indefinite continued progression of existence and events across past, present, and future, regarded collectively as a whole-advancing in an irreversible and uniform succession, and conceptualized as the fourth dimension beyond the three dimensions of space". This definition emphasizes its continuity, directionality, and role as a dimension underlying causality.

3. ECM's Perspective on Time:

ECM does not reject the uniform and unidirectional flow of time.

It treats all frequency displacements, phase transitions, and energetic reversions as events unfolding within the same irreversible temporal continuum. Time in ECM remains the backdrop for the evolution of energetic states, respecting its uniform unidirectionality.

ECM posits that at the universe's ultimate energetic threshold, a cyclic or reversible dynamic might emerge, not by violating the arrow of time, but through the reversion of energy states and frequency collapse at a cosmological limit. This suggests apparent reversals may manifest only at or beyond a critical energetic state, governed by ECM's mass-frequency interplay.

In ECM, time is not an independently flowing dimension but a derived consequence of phase displacement and frequency variation.

What is labelled "negative time" in quantum descriptions does not correspond to a literal reversal of temporal progression in ECM. Instead, it is understood as a localized inversion in phase behaviour or frequency collapse, especially under extreme energetic conditions.

ECM asserts that during all active stages of cosmic and quantum evolution, time retains its irreversible and uniform directionality, tied to the sequential unfolding of energetic events and apparent mass displacement.

The "negative time" observed in quantum optics experiments is interpreted within ECM not as a breakdown of temporal order, but as a manifestation of the extreme sensitivity of Δt to subtle fluctuations in frequency. Relations like 

Tdeg = x/360f = Δt or φ = 2nfΔt 

show that infinitesimal frequency changes can lead to dramatic shifts in Δt, "occasionally producing the illusion of a negative temporal interval". This is considered a deterministic outcome of phase-frequency structure, not a probabilistic anomaly.

ECM accommodates the interpretational appearance of negative time as a phase-based energetic anomaly while preserving the foundational integrity of cosmological temporal unidirectionality.

4. ECM's Critique of Photon Behaviour:

The claim that "photons exhibit a peculiar curly or frizzy structure, an appearance that is difficult to define clearly, often described as vague, indistinct, or hard to perceive" is seen by ECM as referring to interpretational challenges or observational limitations, not an intrinsic structure of photons. Such an appearance might result from entanglement, wave interference, or measurement distortions.

From ECM's standpoint, such ambiguity does not arise. ECM provides a well-defined and continuous description of photon behaviour across all relevant phases, from emission to its ultimate fate. ECM does not admit the notion of photons exhibiting a "curly" or "frizzy" nature, or any inherently unpredictable or ill-defined structure.

In ECM, photon dynamics, especially concerning negative apparent mass, are precisely described and governed by deterministic frequency-based principles. The idea of a photon possessing an inherently vague or chaotic structure is incompatible with the ECM framework.

The claim that "photon behaviour is based on or adapted to a theory of probability; subject to or involving chance variation" is also viewed by ECM as an interpretational challenge or observational limitation.

From ECM's perspective, photon behaviour is neither probabilistic nor indeterminate but is well-defined, coherent, and systematically governed by frequency and mass interactions across gravitational and anti-gravitational regimes. ECM offers a deterministic framework for understanding photon dynamics without resorting to probabilistic uncertainty.

5. Conclusion from ECM Perspective:

The observation of "negative time" at the quantum scale may reflect a temporal phenomenon specific to that scale, but it does not correspond to the irreversible, uniform time progression perceived at the cosmological scale, as clarified by ECM.

ECM suggests that apparent reversals in time may manifest only at or beyond a critical energetic fate.

ECM interprets the "negative time" observed in quantum optics experiments as a deterministic outcome of phase-frequency structure, not a probabilistic anomaly, where infinitesimal frequency changes can lead to dramatic shifts in Δt, creating an "illusion of a negative temporal interval".

ECM frames these behaviours within a causally coherent and structurally governed continuum, never implying retro causality or stochastic indeterminism.

For an interpretive analysis of recent quantum claims in light of this stance, refer to:

🔗 http://www.telitnetwork.itgo.com/ExtendedClassicalMechanics/NegativeTime/

Frequency and Energy in Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM):

Author: Soumendra Nath Thakur | ORCiD: 0000-0003-1871-7803 

Email: postmasterenator@gmail.com

Date: July 21, 2025

In Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM), the concepts of frequency and energy are reinterpreted with frequency (f) taking precedence as the most fundamental descriptor of a physical state. This framework positions frequency as more intrinsic to a system's dynamical evolution, independent of external reference frames, and dimensionally foundational for constructing observable quantities.

Frequency as the Primary Descriptor of Oscillation

In ECM, the argument for frequency's primacy is robust:

Synonymous with Vibration: Frequency isn't just a measure of vibration; it's considered synonymous with it. To talk about something vibrating or oscillating is, by definition, to imply a recurring event, and frequency quantifies that recurrence.

Mathematical Representation: ECM posits that frequency is the "only valid mathematical representation" of repetitive motion. Without a defined frequency, the concept of a regular, repeating vibration or oscillation becomes ill-defined. Consider a simple pendulum: its swing is described by its frequency (or period), not just its displacement.

Definitional Precedence: The idea is that vibration cannot be defined without frequency. This establishes frequency as the primary descriptor for any oscillatory system. It's the intrinsic characteristic that defines the very essence of its repetitive movement.

This perspective elevates frequency from being merely a derived quantity (like energy in the E = hf relation) to being the foundational property from which other related concepts emerge.

Reinterpreting the Planck Relation

The classical Planck relation, E = hf, is fundamentally reinterpreted in ECM. Here's how:

Energy as an Emergent Quantity: Unlike traditional physics where energy is a primary physical quantity, ECM views energy as an emergent concept. It's considered a secondary representation derived from a system's intrinsic frequency of phase transition or oscillation.

Conversion Constant: Instead of Planck's constant (h), ECM introduces its own conversion constant, for example, k = 5.558 × 10^−34 Js, which scales the system's intrinsic frequency to yield energy. This suggests that energy is a consequence of frequency, rather than frequency being a characteristic of energy.

Primacy of Frequency

ECM emphasizes the primacy of frequency over both energy and time (Δt) for several reasons:

Inherent to Dynamical State: Frequency is considered inherent to a system's dynamical state. It directly characterizes the ongoing evolution of a system without requiring an external timekeeper. This contrasts with energy, which depends on factors like system configuration (mass, motion, potential), and time, which is seen as relational and observer-dependent.

Fundamental for Oscillation: Frequency is deemed synonymous with vibration or oscillation and is presented as the only valid mathematical representation of such repetitive motion. It is argued that vibration cannot be defined without frequency, thus establishing frequency as the primary descriptor for oscillatory systems.

Cosmological Implications: In ECM cosmology, phenomena like redshift and energetic shifts are framed in terms of Δf (change in frequency) rather than time-based expansion. This perspective suggests that apparent energetic imbalances (ΔE) or mass variations (ΔM) over a duration (Δt) are governed by the fundamental phase-frequency evolution, not by the passage of time itself.

In essence, ECM proposes a shift from an energy-centric view to one where frequency is the foundational element driving physical processes and defining the nature of reality.

Comparative Analysis Report: Terry McMahon's Reformulations vs. Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM) Framework.

Prepared by: Soumendra Nath Thakur

ORCiD: 0000-0003-1871-7803
Date: July 21, 2025

Scholarly Cross-Comparison Now Live: Read on ResearchGate

Introduction

This report offers a focused, point-by-point comparative analysis between the reformulated physics approach proposed by Terry McMahon in his 2025 paper, Quantum gravity, special relativity & unification QGSM, and the Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM) framework developed independently. Both approaches challenge the foundations of relativity and quantum field theory, offering energy-centric alternatives to spacetime geometry and abstract force-carrying entities. Despite different terminologies, the two share foundational similarities as well as critical divergences.

Comparative Summary Table

Key Theme	Terry McMahon's View	ECM View	Commentary
Lorentz Factor & SR	Lorentz transformation introduces non-physical frame effects. Replaced with an index-based formulation.	SR time dilation is rejected; frequency governs Δt. Frame effects arise from energy-frequency shift, not geometry.	Both reject the Lorentz factor and spacetime-based time dilation. ECM emphasizes frequency displacement instead of dynamic index.
Photon Mass	Photons possess momentum → they must have mass. Mass evolves from bound (<c) to liberated (at c).	Photon/gamma ray emission represents displaced apparent mass (−Mapp), hence carries effective mass component.	Both assert non-zero mass association for free photons. ECM frames this via mass-displacement (ΔMM).
Planck Constant	Δf varies with energy scale. Not truly constant.	k = 5.558 x 10−34 Js derived in ECM as fundamental, linked to f0.	McMahon sees h as dynamic; ECM anchors a similar constant as derived from f0 via energetic continuity.
Gravity Mechanism	G is dimensionally flawed; gravity is energy density dependent, not geometric.	Gravity is mass-binding confinement of Meff; anti-gravity is liberated Mapp. No curved space required.	Both reject GR's geometry. ECM formalizes the binding/release mechanism through energy-mass structuring.
Gravitons & Fields	Gravitons unnecessary; field theory flawed.	No graviton; no field quantization. All transitions are real, observable mass shifts (ΔMM).	Total agreement on non-necessity of virtual field carriers.
Time & Causality	SR's time is geometrical fiction; proper time must emerge from energy-frequency behaviour.	Time is derived as f0; real dynamics follow frequency shift, not relativistic time.	McMahon calls for time redefinition; ECM implements it via f → Δt transformation.
Quantum Gravity	Must emerge from internal energy distributions, not curved spacetime.	ECM sees gravity and anti-gravity as reversible via ΔMM-mediated transitions.	Agreement in rejecting geometrisation in favour of physical transitions.
Unification of Forces	Energy-scaled parameters (running parameters) unify EM and gravity.	Mass-frequency correspondence allows unification without particle mediation.	Parallel strategies: dynamic parameters vs. frequency-mass equivalence.
Resistance from Academia	Journals resist anti-relativistic reformulations.	ECM development has been independent due to similar institutional resistance.	Shared experience of marginalization for paradigm-challenging frameworks.

Conclusion

Terry McMahon's reformulations and the ECM framework arrive independently at converging conclusions: spacetime curvature is not fundamental, time is emergent from energy behaviour, and photons are not massless. Where McMahon uses "running parameters," ECM formalizes transitions using mass-displacement (ΔM_M), effective and apparent mass (M^eff, M^app), and frequency (f) as foundational. This comparative insight opens the door to potential synthesis or mutual reinforcement of both models under a shared principle of energy-centric realism.

Intellectual debate fosters a deeper and more accurate understanding for everything.

July 21, 2025

This statement underscores the transformative power of engaging with diverse perspectives through reasoned discourse. When individuals with differing viewpoints engage in intellectual debate, it's not merely about winning an argument, but about a collaborative process of inquiry.

Through this process, assumptions are challenged, logical inconsistencies are exposed, and ideas are rigorously tested against alternative interpretations and evidence. Participants are compelled to articulate their positions with greater clarity, to consider counter-arguments, and to integrate new information that might refine or even alter their original understanding. This dynamic exchange moves beyond superficial comprehension, leading to a more nuanced, comprehensive, and ultimately, more accurate grasp of the subject matter, whatever it may be. It's a continuous cycle of questioning, defending, learning, and evolving one's understanding.

- Soumendra Nath Thakur

Fundamental Role of Frequency in Physical Description: A Dimensional and Conceptual Justification

Author: Soumendra Nath Thakur | ORCiD: 0000-0003-1871-7803  Email: postmasterenator@gmail.com

Date: July 20, 2025

Scientific Statement:

In Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM), frequency is posited as the most fundamental descriptor of physical state, more primary than both energy (E) and time (Δt), based on its direct association with intrinsic dynamical evolution, independence from external reference systems, and dimensional precedence in the construction of observable quantities.

Description:

In the classical Planck relation E = hf, energy appears as the product of a constant h and frequency f, suggesting an equivalence. However, ECM reinterprets this relation: energy is not a primary physical quantity, but rather an emergent one - a secondary representation of the system's intrinsic frequency of phase transition or oscillation, scaled by a conversion constant (e.g., ECMs k = 5.558 x 10⁻34 Js).

Unlike energy, which depends on system configuration (mass, motion, potential), and time Δt, which is relational and observer-dependent, frequency is inherent to the systems dynamical state. Whether referring to the oscillation of a field, the cycling of a phase, or the emission profile of a particle, frequency directly characterizes the ongoing evolution of the system without requiring an external timekeeper.

This primacy is reinforced by the role of frequency in ECM cosmology, where redshift and energetic shifts are framed in terms of Δf rather than time-based expansion. The apparent energetic imbalance ΔE or mass variation ΔM over a duration Δt is governed by the fundamental phase-frequency evolution, not by the passage of time itself.

Footnote: Frequency as Fundamental

Frequency is more fundamental than energy. It is synonymous with vibration or oscillation, since frequency is the only valid way to mathematically represent such repetitive motion. Vibration cannot be defined without frequency; hence, frequency precedes energy as the primary descriptor of oscillatory systems.

Dimensional Analysis:

Quantity	Symbol	Dimensional Form
Frequency	f	[T⁻1]
Time	Δt	[T]
Energy	E	[ML2T⁻2]
Planck constant or ECM constant	h or k	[ML 2 T⁻1]

From the relation E = hf ⇒ [E] = [h][f]
Substituting dimensions: [ML2T⁻2] = [ML2T⁻1] x [T⁻1]

This confirms frequency is the more elementary term: both energy and Planck's constant depend dimensionally on it. Furthermore, frequency derives solely from inverse time, while energy couples mass, length, and squared inverse time.

Importantly, frequency does not depend on energy, but energy cannot be defined without frequency, if one accepts E = hf as fundamental. Similarly, Δt is just the inverse of frequency, and thus frequency subsumes the role of time as well:

f = 1 / Δt      ⇒      Δt = 1 / f

Therefore, both E and Δt are derived quantities, contingent upon f.

External Validation of Frequency s Primacy in Physical Definition

The ECM position-that frequency is more fundamental than both energy and time-finds clear support in both experimental standards and foundational quantum theory.

1. Time Defined via Frequency in SI Units
   The International System of Units defines the second via the fixed frequency of radiation from cesium-133 atoms:
   

   The second is defined by taking the fixed numerical value of the caesium frequency ∆ν(Cs) to be 9,192,631,770 when expressed in the unit Hz (s⁻¹). - NIST

   This makes time a derived quantity from frequency, not vice versa.
2. Quantum Energy as Frequency of Phase Evolution
   In quantum mechanics, energy is expressed through phase evolution:
   ψ(t) ∝ e−iEt/ħ = e−2πift
   Energy (E) is interpreted as the product of frequency (f) and Planck's constant. This supports the ECM position that frequency governs state evolution.
3. Dimensional Coherence Reinforced
   From E = hf:
   [E] = [h][f] = [ML2T⁻1] x [T⁻1] = [ML2T⁻2]
   Again showing energy is a frequency-scaled quantity.
4. Experimental Clocks Rely on Frequency
   All modern atomic clocks define time intervals by counting cycles of atomic transitions-i.e., frequency. This operational priority supports the ECM claim that time Δt is secondary to frequency.
5. Uncertainty Principle Prioritizes Frequency's Accuracy
   In the energy-time uncertainty relation, a precise energy value requires a long-duration observation of a stable frequency. Thus, frequency accuracy is logically prior to energy definition.

Conclusion:
These empirical and theoretical pillars collectively reinforce the ECM stance:

Frequency is not merely a useful parameter but the ontological basis of time, energy, and mass relations.