Articles, presentations, and so on

The best presentation of the current state of research of my theories

• The article about the Cellular Lattice Model (CLM): "A Condensed Matter Interpretation of SM Fermions and Gauge Fields";
• The article about General Lorentz Ether Theory (GLET): "A generalization of the Lorentz ether to gravity with general-relativistic limit".
• The beamer presentation I would use if I had to give a talk tomorrow;

Ether theory (condensed matter interpretation for modern field theory)

The in my opinion most important paper is that about my ether (condensed matter) model for the standard model of particle physics:

Some background (referee reports, my comments) of this publication.

Foundations of quantum theory

• "Why the Hamilton operator alone is not enough", Found Phys vol.39, p. 486 – 498 (2009), DOI: 10.1007/s10701-009-9299-4, arXiv:0901.3262: MWI depends on the assumption that decoherence defines uniquely a preferred basis. We prove, using some well-known facts from the theory of the Korteweg - de Vries equation, that there are physically different choices of the preferred basis, related to different decompositions of the universe into systems.
• "Pure quantum interpretations are not viable", arXiv:0903.4657v2: Based on the results of arXiv:0901.3262, we argue that not only many worlds has a problem: All interpretations which do not introduce additional structure, like a preferred configuration space, have a non-uniqueness problem. Some simple solutions of this problem are discussed and rejected. (A first version has been rejected by Foundations of Physics, but the report acknowledges that "the paper [is] technically correct and accurate".)
• "A symmetry problem in the Copenhagen interpretation", arXiv:0909.0175v1: Here we use the non-uniqueness problem to attack the Copenhagen interpretation: While it solves the non-uniqueness problem by their association of the canonical operators with experimental arrangements, this association is necessarily vague. This proves that the vague classical part of the Copenhagen interpretation contains physically important information. But in this case, this vague part is also important for the computation of the symmetry group of the theory. To derive an exact symmetry from a vague theory is impossible in principle, which defines a symmetry problem for the Copenhagen interpretation.
• "Overlaps in pilot wave field theories", arXiv:0904.0764: The equivalence proof between pilot wave theories and the corresponding quantum theories contains a weak point: One has to show that macroscopically different states do not overlap significantly in the pilot wave variables. It has been questioned that this holds for pilot wave theories with field ontology. We show that the overlap decreases almost exponentially with the number of particles, thus, becomes insignificant for macroscopic particle numbers.
• "About the relation between pilot wave beables and decoherence", arXiv:0907.5284: We consider the relation between pilot wave beables and decoherence-preferred observables for more general choices of beables.

Quantum gravity

• "The background as a quantum observable: Einstein's hole argument in a quasiclassical context", arXiv:0909.1408v1: We present a quantum version of Einstein's hole argument, with a superposition of two gravitational fields. Different from the classical case, it shows that a covariant, background-free theory cannot describe the physics correctly. (A first version has been rejected by Foundations of Physics.` )

In German

• An FAQ about de Broglie-Bohm pilot wave theory.
• An introduction into Nelsonian stochastics.

In Russian

• An older russian version of the beamer presentation.