Preprint Article Version 5 Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

A Contextual Foundation for Mechanics, Thermodynamics, and Evolution v.5

Version 1 : Received: 19 July 2020 / Approved: 20 July 2020 / Online: 20 July 2020 (11:35:07 CEST)
Version 2 : Received: 17 August 2020 / Approved: 20 August 2020 / Online: 20 August 2020 (09:18:59 CEST)
Version 3 : Received: 1 December 2020 / Approved: 2 December 2020 / Online: 2 December 2020 (11:02:52 CET)
Version 4 : Received: 17 February 2021 / Approved: 18 February 2021 / Online: 18 February 2021 (10:33:37 CET)
Version 5 : Received: 6 March 2021 / Approved: 8 March 2021 / Online: 8 March 2021 (13:48:36 CET)
Version 6 : Received: 19 June 2021 / Approved: 2 July 2021 / Online: 2 July 2021 (14:26:03 CEST)

How to cite: Crecraft, H. A Contextual Foundation for Mechanics, Thermodynamics, and Evolution v.5. Preprints 2020, 2020070469. Crecraft, H. A Contextual Foundation for Mechanics, Thermodynamics, and Evolution v.5. Preprints 2020, 2020070469.


The prevailing interpretations of physics are based on deeply entrenched assumptions, rooted in classical mechanics. Logical implications include: the denial of entropy and irreversible change as fundamental physical properties; the inability to explain random quantum measurements or nonlocality without untestable and implausible metaphysical implications; and the inability to define complexity or explain its evolution. We propose a conceptual model based on empirically justifiable assumptions. The WYSIWYG Conceptual Model (WCM) assumes no hidden properties: “What You can See Is What You Get.” The WCM defines a system’s state in the context of its actual ambient background, and it extends existing models of physical reality by defining entropy and exergy as objective contextual properties of state. The WCM establishes the irreversible production of entropy and the Second law of thermodynamics as a fundamental law of physics. It defines a dissipative system’s measurable rate of internal work as an objective measure of stability of its dissipative process. A dissipative system can follow either of two paths toward higher stability: it can 1) increase its rate of exergy supply (and maximize entropy production) or 2) utilize existing exergy supplies better to increase its internal work rate and functional complexity. These paths guide the evolution of both living and non-living systems.


Physical Foundations; Quantum mechanics; Nonlocality; Time; Entropy; Complexity; Origin of Life


Physical Sciences, Quantum Science and Technology

Comments (2)

Comment 1
Received: 8 March 2021
Commenter: Harrison Crecraft
Commenter's Conflict of Interests: Author
Comment: 1. An error in a thermodynamic postulate was corrected.2. The sections on WCM interpretations of classical and quantum states were integrated and thoroughly reorganized to emphasize the relationships between classical and quantum states. The stationary dissipative quantum state is clearly identified as the source of random physical fluctuations.   3. Minor changes to other sections improve overall clarity and conciseness.
+ Respond to this comment
Comment 2
Received: 17 March 2021
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment: Clarification: Lines 9--19 following Figure 5 should be changed to:

represented in Figure 5 by A↔C↔B. The photons’ measurements at A and B are anticorrelated by virtue of the deterministic link connecting them. No hidden variables or spooky action is required to explain the deterministic and nonlocal correlation of measurements at A and B.
We next consider measurements using randomly oriented polarizers. If Bob’s and Alice’s analyzers are no longer parallel, the system’s surroundings and contextual framework change. Alice cannot know Bob’s result based on her own results; she cannot reversibly measure his signal photon; and the deterministic link connecting them is broken. With obliquely oriented polarizers, the conservation of quantum spin means that the measurements' correlations are statistical. The statistics reflect local random actualizations of anticorrelated potentialities, consistent with Bell’s theorem. Again, no hidden variables or spooky action is required to explain the observed results.
+ Respond to this comment

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our Diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
* All users must log in before leaving a comment
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 2
Metrics 0

Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here.