Overview

Proper Interval locality is a theory that claims the definitive
explanations for:-

1. The wave-particle duality of matter

2. How individual quantum entities are self-interfering

3. How in Aspect's experiment, Bell's inequality can be violated
without in turn violating the special theory of relativity. See Bell's
theorem and Bell test experiments

The theory is self-consistent and explains how the seemingly
contradictory elements found in the modern wisdom arise; notable, how
in quantum mechanics, the unseen development of quantum entities fill
the space bounded by an experimental set up; whilst, the observable
effects of any individual interaction, with a detecting device, always
occur at point location in space.

The theory derives it name from the prediction that spatially remote
electromagnetically charged particles can interact directly; provided
the proper interval separating them has zero magnitude. The theory
thus precludes the possibility that light as mediated by a particle
(The Photon). Clearly this theory has serious implications for the
current "standard model" where force is mediated by vector bosons.

The theory also has major implications for the "Many Worlds
Interpretation" of quantum mechanics since it predicts interference
without the need to invoke the existence of parallel worlds.

(Theory is simple and elegant and uses the basic foundations of
relativity and quantum mechanics, without having to introduce
arbitrary elements such as the photon, compacted dimensions or
parallel worlds)?

The theory argues that the our perception of space, the flow of time
and how our view of the world is restricted to seeing it from a unique
point in space, at any perceived moment in time, is not a result of
the fundamental properties of world geometry but is facilitated by the
group behaviour of quantum ensembles. It is the group behaviour of
quantum ensembles that determines how we perceive the geometry of the
world.

When Einstein named his 1905 paper on special relativity "On the
electrodynamics of moving bodies" The moving bodies he refers can only
be "observable" bodies formed from quantum ensembles (observable
without materially altering their mean physical state.) It is the
group behaviour of the quantum entities forming the observable bodies
that defines their profile their position in space and physical
characteristics.

Above all other considerations theoretical physics depends on the
observer's ability to fix events in space and time relative to
four-fold reference grids. These imaginary grids are drawn over the
observer's perception of the physical world. The gauging of the
reference frames depends on the use of calibrated clocks and rulers.
For any given reference frame the clocks and rulers normally have a
common velocity relative to the observer's perception of the world,
hence the imaginary grids are called inertial reference frames.

The clocks and rulers we use to define our reference grids are formed
from ensembles of quantum entities. It is the group behaviour of these
quantum ensembles that gives rulers their perceived constant profile
in space and clocks their ability to provide us uniform measures of
the passage of time. The perceived uniformity of the behaviour of
clocks and rulers (when at rest relative to each other) allows us to
compare the spatial profiles of different rulers and the time
intervals measured by different clocks thus allowing us to standardise
and calibrate our measurements of time and distance. Thus our
imaginary reference grids are drawn up against hypothetical
measurements using calibrated measures of length and time. The
validity of the reference system being dependent on the uniformity of
the group properties of quantum entities.

Thus it is the group behaviour of quantum entities that is providing
us with our perception of the world and its geometry. It is this group
behaviour that restricts observable events to occur at unique
positions in space for any moment in the observer's sense of time. It
is this group behaviour that allows us to fix on observable event
relative to our reference grids.

Study of motion of observable bodies forms the basis of classical
mechanics; which can be divided into two main branches.

1. Where the relative velocity between the bodies and observers is low
relative to the speed of light. The basis of Newtonian mechanics.

2. Where the relative velocity between bodies and between observers
represents a significant proportion of the speed of light. In this
case the measurements of time and distance between events will be
significantly different for observers with instruments in different
states of motion. Basis of relativistic mechanics.

Basic property of the universe that supports classical mechanics is
the group behaviour of quantum ensembles that gives the observer the
ability to fix the location of observable bodies relative to his
inertial reference frames.

The world as we see it, is as it is because of the way quantum
ensembles behave. The way we perceive space and time, are able to fix
events relative to our inertial reference frames and our ability to
assign physical quantities to bodies all rely on the group behavior of
quantum ensembles. But how do the individual components of matter fit
into the scheme of things. We cannot observe individual quantum
entities. We infer what we think we know about them by the how the
affect observable bodies. (This of course includes the observer, who's
observations of the world are seemingly facilitated by quantum
entities interacting with his sensors.)

The idea of things having locality in the world is fundamental to our survival.

But there is nothing in our perception of physical reality that tells
us for certain that individual quantum entities have a unique fixed
location relative to our reference grids. Although the idea that
individual quantum entities cannot possess a unique locality in the
world runs contrary to the intuition that has sustained our survival
and evolution for billions of years the evidence from quantum
mechanics suggests its an idea we have to get use to.

Proper Interval Locality argues that the wave-particle duality of
matter is an inevitable consequence of the structure of space-time
demanded by relativity. For flat space-time there is a close
relationship between the invariance of the laws of physics, the
constancy of the speed of light in all inertial reference frames and
the wave-particle duality of matter. The theory maintains that the
explanation of the wave-particle duality of matter lies in
understanding the nature of locality relative to our coordinate
systems. In particular, it lies in the difference between the locality
of observable bodies (quantum ensembles) and the hypothetical locality
of quantum entities relative to our inertial reference frames. Our
methods for observing and measuring length and time using clocks and
rulers enable us to fix events concerning observable bodies, in space
and time relative to our four fold reference grids. Where the
reference grids themselves are defined and gauged using clocks and
rulers. Thus our ability to reference locality is dependent on clocks
and rulers, in particular the invariance of their spatial and temporal
profiles within a given inertial state. Since clocks and rulers are
composed of countless individual quantum entities forming quantum
ensemble then our ability to reference the locality of observable
bodies is wholly dependent on the group behaviour of quantum
ensembles. The most fundamental elements of matter are not observable;
we cannot measure their position in space. Note Observations of the
position of a quantum object are often considered when discussing
Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. However this may refer, say, to a
slit in a barrier. The narrower the slit then the more accurately we
know its position; that is the position of the slit not the position
of the position of the quantum entity. We can reduce the size of such
a slit indefinitely and if the quantum entity appears to pass through
the slit then the behaviour of the quantum object will be modified by
the slit in accordance with Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle. But a
no time would we have been able to say the quantum entity was unique
placed in the slit.

All information regarding quantum entities must be inferred from how
we believe they affect observable bodies. This is the sort of
information that comes from experiments such as: - Young's double slit
experiment. The photoelectric effect The Compton Effect The violation
of Bell's inequality in Aspect's experiment. But the results from
these experiments seem to provide a logically contradictory view of
the world, where matter behaves both like waves and particle and
information seems o move around at super luminal speed thus seemingly
defying the special theory of relativity. Proper Interval Locality
argues that these contradictions arise from our lack of understanding
of how the locality of quantum entities are projected on to our
inertial reference grids. Proper Interval Locality argues that the
wave-particle duality of matter is an inevitable consequence of the
structure of space-time demanded by relativity. For flat space-time
there is a close relationship between the invariance of the laws of
physics, the constancy of the speed of light in all inertial reference
frames and the wave-particle duality of matter. The theory maintains
that the explanation of the wave-particle duality of matter lies in
understanding the nature of locality relative to our coordinate
systems. In particular, it lies in the difference between the locality
of observable bodies (quantum ensembles) and the hypothetical locality
of quantum entities relative to our inertial reference frames. Our
methods for observing and measuring length and time using clocks and
rulers enable us to fix events concerning observable bodies, in space
and time relative to our four fold reference grids. Where the
reference grids themselves are defined and gauged using clocks and
rulers. Thus our ability to reference locality is dependent on clocks
and rulers, in particular the invariance of their spatial and temporal
profiles within a given inertial state. Since clocks and rulers are
composed of countless individual quantum entities forming quantum
ensemble then our ability to reference the locality of observable
bodies is wholly dependent on the group behaviour of quantum
ensembles. The most fundamental elements of matter are not observable;
we cannot measure their position in space. Note Observations of the
position of a quantum object are often considered when discussing
Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. However this may refer, say, to a
slit in a barrier. The narrower the slit then the more accurately we
know its position; that is the position of the slit not the position
of the position of the quantum entity. We can reduce the size of such
a slit indefinitely and if the quantum entity appears to pass through
the slit then the behaviour of the quantum object will be modified by
the slit in accordance with Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle. But a
no time would we have been able to say the quantum entity was unique
placed in the slit.

All information regarding quantum entities must be inferred from how
we believe they affect observable bodies. This is the sort of
information that comes from experiments such as: - Young's Double-slit
experiment. The photoelectric effect The Compton scattering The
violation of Bell's inequality in Aspect's experiment. But the results
from these experiments seem to provide a logically contradictory view
of the world, where matter behaves both like waves and particle and
information seems o move around at super luminal speed thus seemingly
defying the special theory of relativity. Proper Interval Locality
argues that these contradictions arise from our lack of understanding
of how the locality of quantum entities are projected on to our
inertial reference grids. Proper Interval Locality argues that the
wave-particle duality of matter is an inevitable consequence of the
structure of space-time demanded by relativity. For flat space-time
there is a close relationship between the invariance of the laws of
physics, the constancy of the speed of light in all inertial reference
frames and the wave-particle duality of matter. The theory maintains
that the explanation of the wave-particle duality of matter lies in
understanding the nature of locality relative to our coordinate
systems. In particular, it lies in the difference between the locality
of observable bodies (quantum ensembles) and the hypothetical locality
of quantum entities relative to our inertial reference frames. Our
methods for observing and measuring length and time using clocks and
rulers enable us to fix events concerning observable bodies, in space
and time relative to our four fold reference grids. Where the
reference grids themselves are defined and gauged using clocks and
rulers. Thus our ability to reference locality is dependent on clocks
and rulers, in particular the invariance of their spatial and temporal
profiles within a given inertial state. Since clocks and rulers are
composed of countless individual quantum entities forming quantum
ensemble then our ability to reference the locality of observable
bodies is wholly dependent on the group behaviour of quantum
ensembles. The most fundamental elements of matter are not observable;
we cannot measure their position in space. Note Observations of the
position of a quantum object are often considered when discussing
Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. However this may refer, say, to a
slit in a barrier. The narrower the slit then the more accurately we
know its position; that is the position of the slit not the position
of the position of the quantum entity. We can reduce the size of such
a slit indefinitely and if the quantum entity appears to pass through
the slit then the behaviour of the quantum object will be modified by
the slit in accordance with Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle. But a
no time would we have been able to say the quantum entity was unique
placed in the slit.

All information regarding quantum entities must be inferred from how
we believe they affect observable bodies. This is the sort of
information that comes from experiments such as: - Young's double slit
experiment. The photoelectric effect The Compton Effect The violation
of Bell's inequality in Aspect's experiment. But the results from
these experiments seem to provide a logically contradictory view of
the world, where matter behaves both like waves and particle and
information seems o move around at super luminal speed thus seemingly
defying the special theory of relativity. Proper Interval Locality
argues that these contradictions arise from our lack of understanding
of how the locality of quantum entities are projected on to our
inertial reference grids. Proper Interval Locality argues that the
wave-particle duality of matter is an inevitable consequence of the
structure of space-time demanded by relativity. For flat space-time
there is a close relationship between the invariance of the laws of
physics, the constancy of the speed of light in all inertial reference
frames and the wave-particle duality of matter. The theory maintains
that the explanation of the wave-particle duality of matter lies in
understanding the nature of locality relative to our coordinate
systems. In particular, it lies in the difference between the locality
of observable bodies (quantum ensembles) and the hypothetical locality
of quantum entities relative to our inertial reference frames. Our
methods for observing and measuring length and time using clocks and
rulers enable us to fix events concerning observable bodies, in space
and time relative to our four fold reference grids. Where the
reference grids themselves are defined and gauged using clocks and
rulers. Thus our ability to reference locality is dependent on clocks
and rulers, in particular the invariance of their spatial and temporal
profiles within a given inertial state. Since clocks and rulers are
composed of countless individual quantum entities forming quantum
ensemble then our ability to reference the locality of observable
bodies is wholly dependent on the group behaviour of quantum
ensembles. The most fundamental elements of matter are not observable;
we cannot measure their position in space. Note Observations of the
position of a quantum object are often considered when discussing
Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. However this may refer, say, to a
slit in a barrier. The narrower the slit then the more accurately we
know its position; that is the position of the slit not the position
of the position of the quantum entity. We can reduce the size of such
a slit indefinitely and if the quantum entity appears to pass through
the slit then the behaviour of the quantum object will be modified by
the slit in accordance with Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle. But a
no time would we have been able to say the quantum entity was unique
placed in the slit.

All information regarding quantum entities must be inferred from how
we believe they affect observable bodies. This is the sort of
information that comes from experiments such as: - Young's double slit
experiment. The photoelectric effect The Compton Effect The violation
of Bell's inequality in Aspect's experiment. But the results from
these experiments seem to provide a logically contradictory view of
the world, where matter behaves both like waves and particle and
information seems o move around at super luminal speed thus seemingly
defying the special theory of relativity. Proper Interval Locality
argues that these contradictions arise from our lack of understanding
of how the locality of quantum entities are projected on to our
inertial reference grids. Proper Interval Locality argues that the
wave-particle duality of matter is an inevitable consequence of the
structure of space-time demanded by relativity. For flat space-time
there is a close relationship between the invariance of the laws of
physics, the constancy of the speed of light in all inertial reference
frames and the wave-particle duality of matter. The theory maintains
that the explanation of the wave-particle duality of matter lies in
understanding the nature of locality relative to our coordinate
systems. In particular, it lies in the difference between the locality
of observable bodies (quantum ensembles) and the hypothetical locality
of quantum entities relative to our inertial reference frames. Our
methods for observing and measuring length and time using clocks and
rulers enable us to fix events concerning observable bodies, in space
and time relative to our four fold reference grids. Where the
reference grids themselves are defined and gauged using clocks and
rulers. Thus our ability to reference locality is dependent on clocks
and rulers, in particular the invariance of their spatial and temporal
profiles within a given inertial state. Since clocks and rulers are
composed of countless individual quantum entities forming quantum
ensemble then our ability to reference the locality of observable
bodies is wholly dependent on the group behaviour of quantum
ensembles. The most fundamental elements of matter are not observable;
we cannot measure their position in space. Note Observations of the
position of a quantum object are often considered when discussing
Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. However this may refer, say, to a
slit in a barrier. The narrower the slit then the more accurately we
know its position; that is the position of the slit not the position
of the position of the quantum entity. We can reduce the size of such
a slit indefinitely and if the quantum entity appears to pass through
the slit then the behaviour of the quantum object will be modified by
the slit in accordance with Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle. But a
no time would we have been able to say the quantum entity was unique
placed in the slit.

All information regarding quantum entities must be inferred from how
we believe they affect observable bodies. This is the sort of
information that comes from experiments such as: - Young's double slit
experiment. The photoelectric effect The Compton Effect The violation
of Bell's inequality in Aspect's experiment. But the results from
these experiments seem to provide a logically contradictory view of
the world, where matter behaves both like waves and particle and
information seems o move around at super luminal speed thus seemingly
defying the special theory of relativity. Proper Interval Locality
argues that these contradictions arise from our lack of understanding
of how the locality of quantum entities are projected on to our
inertial reference grids.

Our reasoning suggests that our perceived unique locality of events
and our ability to assign paths to "moving bodies" relative to our
reference grids is a product of observation. Observation, itself,
being dependent on the group behavior of quantum ensembles that in
turn is dependent on the behavior of individual quantum entities and
their interactions all of which is occurs within the event arena of
space-time. We use space-time diagrams to represent the motion of
observed and measured bodies relative to our inertial reference grids.
The space-time diagram is essentially a Euclidian and is not a true
reflection of the geometry of the world. The principle of proper
interval locality argues that the wave-particle duality of matter and
the associated contradictions in our understanding of physical reality
originate from the difference between the perceived false geometry of
the world and the true geometry experienced by quantum entities.

To understand how the wave particle duality of matter develops we must
understand how events experienced by individual quantum entities are
hypothetically projected on to our inertial reference frames.
Remembering that our reference frames are imaginary grids drawn over
our perception of space and time. They are a product of how we measure
and represent length and time and do not reflect the true geometry of
our world. What happens to quantum entities exists in the true natural
geometry of the universe. It is how quantum events relate to our false
reference geometry that is the key to understanding how we create a
mathematical description of quantum entities that requires them to
have characteristics of both particle and waves.

To gain this understanding we must turn to Initially to the Special relativity

The central postulates of the special theory of relativity are: -

1.All motion is relative and there is no privileged state of rest, the
laws of physics being the same in all states of motion.

2. The speed of light is the same for all all observers regardless of
their state of motion.

Given these postulates then the values of sets of coordinates for a
given event when measured in different inertial frames are related by
the Lorentz transformation. Pil argues that there is a close and
fundamental relationship between the fundamental postluates of
relativity, the Lorentz transformation and the development of the wave
particle duality of matter. It further argues that the form of
space-time demanded by the postulates of special relativity and the
Lorentz transformation actually preclude the possibility of assigning
unique sets of coordinatesto describe the location of an event in the
history of a quantum object. That is there is not a one to one
correspondence between how a quantum entity experiences an event in
the "true" geometry of space-time and how that event is hypothetically
projected on to our inertial reference grids. The Lorentz
transformation holds the key to understanding how quantum events are
projected on to our inertial reference grids and hence a deeper
understanding of how quantum objects behave relative to our coordinate
systems.

To achieve this understanding we need to look to the relationship
between the sets of coordinates assigned to events and the apparent
proper interval separating them.

Hermann Minkowski showed that for any two events with, respectively,
assigned coordinates (X1 , Y1 , Z1 , T1) and (X2 , Y2 , Z2 , T2) then
assuming the Lorentz transformation the proper interval between the
two events is: -

ΔS2 = ((X2 –X1)2 + (Y2-Y1)2 + (Z2-Z1)2 – c2(T2-T1)2)1/2

This equation is known as the Minkowski Metric and is said to have a
metric signature of (3, 1).

This signature creates the interesting property that pairs of events
that are spatially separated from each other can be separated by an
interval that has zero magnitude providing the square of the temporal
element is equal to minus the sum of the squares of the spatial
elements.

ΔS2= 0

If

((X2 –X1)2 + (Y2-Y1)2 + (Z2-Z1)2 = c2(T2-T1)2)1/2

If we fix one of the events P (X1, Y1, Z1, T1) then all other events
(X, Y, Z, T) that fulfill the requirement form a cone relative to our
inertial reference grids. In relativity theory this cone is called a
light cone. In the standard theory the future light cone represents
all events that can be reached by a light pulse from P and the past
light cone represents all events that can send a light pulse to P.

In proper interval locality the light cone represents all events that
are properly local to event P or properly contiguous with event P.
This idea has major implications for how theoretically the locality of
quantum entities relates to our inertial reference grids.

Contrary to Einstein assertion that causality is governed by the
Principle of locality, our new interpretation suggests that what
happens at a given event in space-time cannot be independent of what
is going on elsewhere in the universe. An event at the apex of a light
cone cannot be independent of the states of the world elsewhere on the
light cone. Each event on the light cone is contiguous with the apex
of the cone. The state of the world at the apex of the cone can
influence events anywhere on the cone and the state of the world at
any point on the light cone can influence what happens at the apex.
Proper interval locality interprets this as events at a fundamental
level do not have a unique location relative to our inertia reference
frames. A distinction is drawn up between observable locality,
observed events can be assigned unique locality relative to our
inertial frames of reference; whilst the unobservable events involving
the fundamental states of the universe do not possess unique locality
but are projected onto our inertial reference frames as light cones.

Events involving quantum entities are projected onto our reference
grids as light cones. A quantum event involving an electron or an atom
cannot have an exact location on our reference grids. The way we have
developed our measuring and referencing systems precludes the
possibility of quantum entities having unique locality relative to our
space-time constructs.

Thus the locality of an event involving a quantum object is primarily
projected onto our inertial reference frames as a light cone. This we
shall call the primary conical projection of the quantum object.
However every event on the primary light cone cannot be independent of
what happens elsewhere in the universe thus each event on the primary
conical projection acts a source for the projection of further light
cones thus creating an infinite progression of light cones that
eventually cause the quantum event to be projected over space-time in
its entirety. However, any effect on observable events caused by the
presence of the quantum object are much more likely to occur in the
vicinity of the apex of the primary conical projection than in
observed locations that are spatially or temporally remote from the
apex.

Relative to our inertial reference frames quantum events ( a unique
moments in the history of a quantum object not a quantum interaction
between quantum objects) unlike observable events do not have unique
sets of coordinates, instead hypothetically they are projected on to
our space-time construct as light cones. The apex of such a light cone
is, according to the theory, is called the proper interval locality of
the quantum event; the light cone is the primary projection of the
event. All sets of coordinates on the primary conical projection of
the quantum event project further light cones; resulting in an
infinite succession of conical projections that cause the physical
presence of the quantum object to fill the entire space-time arena, as
referenced by our grid system. It is this infinite succession of
projections that is responsible for quantum objects interfering with
themselves.

The probability of two quantum objects interacting, assuming their
quantum states are amenable, will depend on spatial separation of
their respective event apexes. (inverse square law). Since the quantum
objects do not have unique locations relative to our reference grids
then neither do their interactions. Quantum interactions simply occur
in space-time. However, quantum interactions sometimes produce
observable effects, for instance the response of a photomultiplier.
Any observable effects resulting from a quantum interaction must occur
at a unique set of coordinates relative to our reference grids. In
this case the observed effect occurs at the location of the
photomultiplier.

An absorber quantum system, which is a constituent part (part of the
photocathode) of the photomultiplier i.e. the word-line of its event
apex is located within the Photomultiplier and follows the world-line
of the photomultiplier. The absorber system interacts with some remote
donor system, the excitation of the absorber system causes the release
an electron through the photoelectric effect and a cascade occurs that
creates sufficient electrons for a pulse to be generated at the anode
and for an observable effect to be registered. Conventionally the
pulse would signify the arrival of a photon at the photocathode. But
proper interval locality says that the photon cannot exist and the
observable event was initiated by the interaction of quantum systems
via zero interval paths.

See The Wheeler–Feynman absorber theory

The Wave-Particle Duality of Matter and the Metric Signature of Space-Time.

The major difficulty with the metrics of relativity is the inertial
reference grids cannot be properly graphically represented. In the
conventional space-time diagram using rectilinear coordinates it is
only the measures of distance and time that can be represented with
direct proportionality. If relative to a given inertial frame two
events (X1 , Y1 , Z1 , T1) and (X2 , Y2 , Z2 , T2) are separated by
both distance and time then graphically the interval between them
appears as : -

ΔS2 = ((X2 –X1)2 + (Y2-Y1)2 + (Z2-Z1)2 + c2(T2-T1)2)1/2, the
Pythagorean metric of Eucldean geometry.

Compare this with the Minkowski metric, we see that in general the
representation of the interval is elongated in the space-time diagram.
In order to gain a better understanding of what is going on, the
theory uses another form of representation called a proper interval
diagram. In the proper interval diagram we choose (from a space-time
diagram) a single set of coordinates (X0 , Y0 , Z0 , T0), from this
event O we draw the gulf to any other event P proportionally to the
proper interval separating it from O; rather that using the
Pythagorean hypotenuse. In this new representation we find the axes
compared with space-time diagram are unaffected by the transformation
where as all other grid lines became curved and non-linear. Such that
the light cone found in the space-time diagram whose apex is at event
O, collapses entirely on the point O in the proper interval diagram.

But quantum entities are primarily projected onto space-time diagrams
as light-cones but if we draw a proper interval diagram centred on the
apex of the light-cone (relative to the space-time diagram) then
relative to the proper interval diagram the quantum entity collapses
to a point. In other words relative to the proper interval diagram an
event on a quantum entity does not have unique location in space but
is distributed through out space-time, but relative to the proper
interval diagram the event has a unique location and the quantum
entity takes on a particle like aspect.

These are the very characteristics that are contradictory in the
standard theory. A wave being distributed in space; whereas a particle
has a unique position in space. But in now seems our analysis of the
demands of relativity on the character of space-time forces the
fundamental elements of matter to have such qualities. Relative to a
space-time diagram based on a given inertial reference frame
hypothetically the primary projection quantum event proceeds from past
to present as an advanced wave once the wave passes through the event
apex it spreads out as a retarded wave. In flat space-time these waves
travel at the speed of light and extend indefinitely. (It is
interesting to consider what happens if the hypothesis of the big bang
is correct and space-time collapses into a singularity at the moment
of creation. In that case relative to our reference space-time the
advanced wave begins its journey at the creation event. This implies
that what happened at the creation is not independent of what is
happening now?)

Relative to the proper interval diagram, based on the same inertial
reference grid as a space-time diagram, the light cone of a primary surface projection of a quantum
event collapses into a singularity. Giving us a perspective that
causes the quantum entity to look like a particle.

The theory of proper interval locality is successful in explaining the
interference of light and also to explain how Bell's inequality can be
violated without compromising the theory of relativity.