What the framework opens up
Connecting the questions.
Opening up research.
Probabilistic presentism is an overarching framework: it connects facts, possibilities and traces, then explores the consequences of this interpretation for physics.
Why connect all these questions?
You have followed a glass, its fall and its traces. The model now seeks to follow the same thread at other scales: from quantum events to galaxies.
One starting point: the present carries possibilities.
- Facts follow one anotherBecoming and time
- An organization is maintainedThe stability of matter
- The field varies from place to placeThe interpretation of gravity
- Possibilities yield a localized resultThe quantum interpretation
What is preserved.
What the model adds.
Relativity
Preserved: relativistic causality, without a single present synchronized throughout the Universe. Additionally proposed: a description of local becoming and its connection to measured duration.
Quantum physics
Preserved: the usual outcome probabilities, adopted through the Born rule, and the impossibility of sending a faster-than-light message through entanglement. Additionally proposed: an interpretation of the transition from possibilities to fact, then to trace.
Gravity
Already formulated: a connection to Newtonian gravity in a static regime and a limit towards general relativity. Additionally proposed: the physical contribution of the field of possibilities, with regimes envisaged for dark matter and dark energy.
These connections have a domain of validity. They do not demonstrate compatibility in every regime: the stability and precise consequences of the equations remain to be checked.
What if possibilities had a physical role?
The model goes beyond a way of thinking about time. It proposes that the field of possibilities has energy, evolves and contributes to gravity. Equations already describe these relationships.
How is this field described?
The field is denoted π. Its equations are covariant: their physical form is preserved under changes of coordinates. Relativistic causality belongs to the core of the model.
A slope, not just a value.
A plateau can be high without being sloped. Likewise, the value of the field and its variation in space have distinct roles. The model relates its variations to a contribution to acceleration.
Under certain conditions, the equations recover known descriptions of gravity. This is an important connection; it is not sufficient to validate the model in every situation.
What are the connections with Newton and Einstein?
V2 presents a connection to Newtonian gravity in a static regime and a limit towards general relativity. In the minimal model, gravitational waves propagate at the speed of light.
The corrections to be compared with observations and the stability of the solutions remain to be tested.
Two puzzles, not one phenomenon
Why talk about dark matter?
In galaxies, stellar motions and the bending of light indicate gravity that the observed stars and gas cannot explain in the usual framework. “Dark matter” is the unseen matter proposed to explain this additional effect.
And dark energy?
On very large scales, distances between galaxies that are not bound together increase: the Universe is expanding. Observations indicate that this expansion is accelerating. “Dark energy” is the name given to what accounts for this acceleration in the usual cosmological model. It is therefore not the same problem as dark matter.
Independent background: Dark matter — NASA · Dark energy — NASA
Can a field retain the effects of its history?
Think of water after a boat has passed: the boat is farther away, but its wake continues. This image helps explain a simple idea: a system's present state can carry the effects of what happened to it.
The passage
The wake persists
The preprint envisages a field configuration shaped by its history that continues to have gravitational effects. This is the meaning of the proposed remanence: physical memory, not conscious recollection.
One field, two proposed behaviors
A spring can move, but it can also store energy when compressed. Without being a spring, the proposed field likewise has energy associated with its variations and energy associated with its state. The preprint explores two roles: a contribution to the gravity attributed to dark matter, and a contribution to the accelerated expansion attributed to dark energy.
Connecting the two questions is not enough to solve them: consistent calculations must reproduce the observations.
The two regimes in the equations
Its dynamical component can play the role of dark matter in a regime where its average pressure vanishes. The field retains a configuration shaped by its history: this is the remanence being envisaged.
Its potential energy, when dominant, can produce negative pressure associated with accelerated expansion.
It remains to be shown that these regimes jointly reproduce observations of galaxies, gravitational lensing, expansion and structure formation.
What could distinguish it from other explanations?
Recovering a known result establishes a connection. To distinguish the model from other explanations, it is also necessary to calculate a distinctive effect, state what is expected and then compare it with observations.
Galaxies and expansion
The field's memory suggests comparing galaxies with similar visible mass but different histories. The expected effects on their rotation and the deflection of light need to be quantified, and the same framework must also be checked against expansion and structure formation.
Possible actualization noise
The proposed fluctuations could leave a signal in interference experiments or gravitational measurements. The parameters and expected signal remain to be calculated for a specific experiment. Unexplained noise, by itself, would confirm nothing.
What would put a proposal in difficulty
A quantitative prediction contradicted by reliable and sufficiently precise measurements would challenge the proposal being tested. Parameters that could be adjusted to explain any result after the fact would prevent a genuine test.
These are avenues for testing, not quantitative predictions already confirmed. Without an observable difference, the framework would remain an interpretation rather than an experimentally distinct theory.
A cosmological extension can fail without invalidating the entire reflection on the present, possibilities and traces. Each proposal must be assessed at its own level.