Dear Sandeep,

my two cent's worth.

1. Claim of “recent groundbreaking research”: references a DOI (10.13140/RG.2.2.27077.15845)

- What kind of mathematical model or experimental setup was used?

- What data or theoretical derivations support the claim that entropy can remain constant in macroscopic systems?

Entropic arguments

The idea that constant entropy could enable time reversal on a large scale contradicts standard thermodynamic principles is difficult to reconcile. While there are exotic conditions in which entropy may locally decrease or remain nearly constant (e.g., in closed, carefully engineered quantum systems), such scenarios typically do not generalize straightforwardly to large, open, real-world systems. Without a rigorous scientific explanation, this claim appears too broad.

2. Mix of Science and Metaphysics

Metaphysical speculation (“God’s science,” pre-Big Bang, etc.)

The question/discussion jumps from discussing time reversal and entropy to pondering “God’s science,” the pre-Big Bang era, and “timeless and spaceless realms.”

While big-picture philosophical questions can be stimulating, mixing highly speculative metaphysical ideas with still-unverified scientific hypotheses can blur the line between scientific inquiry and personal speculation. This shift can sometimes diminish the academic rigor of the discussion.

Scope of proposed applications

The text leaps from a theoretical possibility of time reversal to grandiose applications—regenerating ecosystems, reversing diseases, and preventing disasters. These real-world implications can be an interesting speculative discussion, but there is no substantiated bridge explaining how one might move from theoretical time-symmetric physics to large-scale interventions in biological or ecological systems.

3. Challenges to Thermodynamics and Causality

Thermodynamic laws

The second law of thermodynamics is among the most tested principles in physics, asserting that entropy in an isolated system tends to increase over time. Although microscopic processes can exhibit time-reversible equations of motion (in the sense of fundamental physics equations), macroscopic irreversibility arises from statistical arguments and overwhelmingly large numbers of particles.

Any claim of true macroscopic time reversal must grapple with would include:

- The statistical basis of the second law.

- The practical impossibility of controlling every microscopic degree of freedom in a large system.

and.. How such control or conditions would be achieved to keep entropy constant or allow it to reverse in a real, physical setting.

Causality and arrow of time

The arrow of time is deeply embedded not only in thermodynamics, but also in relativistic, cosmological, and quantum field theory frameworks. Proposing that the arrow of time can be reversed at a macroscopic level requires a robust theory explaining how causality (the link between cause and effect) remains consistent. Much more detail needs to be provided on reconciling this with existing physics.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence...

THE problem to resolve, by way of summation (as is with many theories) - Scientific Merit vs. Speculative Leap

Enthusiasm can drive new hypotheses, but those hypotheses must be supported by rigorous methodology and validation. It has to include minimum critical details—such as experimental design, mathematical derivations, et al.

As is the case with many others; the true test of these claims lies in how they hold up under formal scrutiny. Are there reproducible experimental or computational demonstrations?

I do however think these questions are to be asked and discussed, as they form part essential element of human knowledge progression.

best

H

Harri Shore, I agree with all of the points you made here, and especially with regard to mixing science and metaphysics.

I would ask Sandeep Jaiswal for examples of how his theory might be falsified. Lacking examples of how a theory might be falsified, can the theory qualify as being science? And how is the word "time" defined in this theory?

Best,

JCNS

Dear Harri Shore and J. C. N. Smith,

Thank you for your thoughtful and critical engagement with my work. I value your inputs, as they provide an opportunity to clarify and substantiate the claims made in my paper (DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27077.15845). Below, I address your points comprehensively:

1. Mathematical Model and Entropic Argument

The mathematical model presented in my paper derives from fundamental principles, combining statistical mechanics and quantum formulations. Specifically, I introduce a novel approach where entropy remains constant under specific boundary conditions, which are derivable from time-symmetric Hamiltonian dynamics.

To address your question on derivation, I mathematically demonstrate that for a specially isolated system (which I term "quasi-adiabatic quantum systems"), the entropy function ΔS=0\Delta S = 0ΔS=0. This is not speculative but derived rigorously using:

• Time-reversible equations of motion from Liouville's theorem applied to specific Hamiltonian systems.
• Constraints on initial and final states that balance microstate probabilities.

The generalisation to macroscopic systems requires careful setup, but the conditions and derivations provided in the paper are mathematically consistent.

2. Time Reversal and the Second Law of Thermodynamics

The second law of thermodynamics, though one of the most tested principles, is statistical in nature. While it asserts an increasing entropy trend for macroscopic systems, it does not categorically preclude constant or decreasing entropy in controlled environments or specific edge cases.

For example, in modern experiments on quantum systems (e.g., recent studies on Maxwell's demon and quantum information entropy), local reversals of entropy have been demonstrated. My work builds on such theoretical and experimental advancements, suggesting that macroscopic time reversal is feasible under certain engineered constraints, albeit with significant technological challenges.

As for your query on controlling microscopic degrees of freedom, this would require advancements in quantum control technologies, which are rapidly progressing, as evidenced in fields like quantum computing and Bose-Einstein condensates.

3. Scope and Applications

I agree that a leap from theoretical constructs to large-scale biological or ecological interventions requires substantiation. However, my focus is to establish the theoretical foundation, which lays the groundwork for such applications in the future. Time-symmetric physics could, for instance, provide insights into reversing entropy-driven processes at molecular levels, opening avenues for disease treatment and ecological restoration.

While speculative applications must follow rigorous validation, they do not diminish the validity of the foundational theory. My paper's contribution is to demonstrate that the mathematical and logical framework permits such possibilities.

4. Science vs. Metaphysics

I respect the distinction between science and metaphysics. The mention of "timeless, spaceless realms" and pre-Big Bang conditions is not an attempt to conflate the two but to extend the implications of my findings.

In my derivation, the timeless and spaceless state arises naturally from a state of zero entropy, which aligns with certain cosmological models like Penrose's Conformal Cyclic Cosmology or quantum vacuum fluctuations. These ideas remain within the purview of theoretical physics and are supported by peer-reviewed research.

5. Falsifiability and Definition of Time

J.C.N. Smith raises an excellent point on falsifiability. My theory is falsifiable under the following conditions:

• If entropy is empirically demonstrated to increase inevitably in systems where my derived conditions (quasi-adiabatic isolation) are met, the theory would be invalidated.
• If experiments designed to achieve quasi-time reversal fail consistently under controlled conditions, the theory would require reevaluation.

Regarding the definition of time, in my framework, time is treated as a parameter arising from sequential changes in state probabilities within a Hamiltonian system. This definition aligns with standard formulations in quantum mechanics and general relativity.

6. Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence

I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment. The evidence I present is grounded in rigorous mathematical derivation, which is reproducible and verifiable. While experimental demonstrations are limited by current technology, they are not beyond the realm of feasibility.

I appreciate your concerns about the need for rigorous methodology and validation. My derivations, though concise, meet the highest standards of logical consistency and align with historical precedents in scientific breakthroughs, where a single correct equation revolutionised our understanding (e.g., Einstein's E=mc2).

I thank you for raising these critical questions, as they highlight the importance of robust scientific discourse. My work challenges entrenched paradigms, but it is grounded in mathematics and aligned with emerging experimental evidence.

I invite you to review the detailed derivations and supporting arguments in my paper. As we continue this discussion, I hope we can explore these concepts further, fostering a deeper understanding of time, entropy, and their implications for science and humanity.

Best regards, Sandeep Jaiswal DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27077.15845

Dear Sandeep,

Thank you for elaborating on your ideas and discussing how Liouville’s theorem and quasi-adiabatic quantum systems might maintain constant entropy under tightly controlled conditions.

However, a few points of concern remain:

1. Scaling to Macroscopic Systems

While small-scale quantum experiments can exhibit local entropy fluctuations, extending these phenomena to true macroscopic reversals still raises significant questions. Real environments introduce interaction with countless degrees of freedom—radiation, heat flow, friction, and so forth. I would definitely recommend to see a more concrete roadmap for controlling or countering these effects in practice.

2. Experimental Validation

Although mathematical derivations can be sound, empirical tests are crucial to confirm that your framework holds beyond isolated, idealized scenarios.

It may be useful to propose specific experimental setups or benchmarks (even if quite challenging) to demonstrate partial or limited reversals. Showing how your theoretical constraints can be approximated in real systems would strengthen the scientific standing of your work.

3. Complexity of Real-World Applications

You rightly emphasize that your current focus is theoretical. Still, the leap to interventions like reversing diseases or ecological damage hinges on extreme control over thermodynamic processes. Highlighting near-term experimental goals (quantum control, laboratory-scale tests) before extrapolating to large-scale phenomena would enhance the credibility of your claims.

4. Cosmological and Metaphysical Aspects

It is encouraging that you draw parallels with advanced cosmological models, but rigorous physical evidence for conditions like pre-Big Bang states is notoriously elusive. Clarifying where your theory aligns with established cosmological frameworks—and acknowledging any gaps—will help readers distinguish your solid calculations from more speculative extensions.

Overall, your detailed response shows clear dedication to grounding your ideas in formal physics. I would encourage focusing on how these principles could be investigated experimentally—if only at small scales—to demonstrate feasibility. If the community sees reproducible evidence that quasi-adiabatic isolation can keep entropy constant in any realistic system, that would be a groundbreaking step.

Thank you again for engaging in this constructive dialogue.

Sincerely,

Harri

Sandeep Jaiswal and Harri Shore

Thank you both for your helpful and constructive comments. Given those comments, I would like to offer a somewhat different perspective.

When discussing the topic of time reversal, it is crucially important to pay scrupulous attention to precise definitions. The history of the universe, from the big bang to the present, is made up of a sequence of what I will call "specific moments in time," (i.e., specific moments in history). Now, I would propose that what we refer to as "a particular moment in time" is identically equivalent to, and is completely defined by, and only by, a particular configuration of the universe. Moreover, I would propose that what we perceive and refer to as "the flow of time" is, in reality, nothing more and nothing less than the evolution of the physical universe, an evolution governed by rules that we strive to understand and that we refer to as the laws of physics. (If you have other definitions for particular moments in time or for the flow of time, I would welcome learning about them.)

In order for time reversal to occur on a scale that might have practical applications, whether in areas such as medicine or the environment or elsewhere, it would be necessary to revert to some particular earlier moment in the history of our planet, i.e., in the history of the universe. To accomplish a feat such as that, however, we would need to revert to some earlier configuration of the entire universe, writ large. The likelihood of accomplishing that feat, however, I think you would agree, is diminishingly small. Those earlier specific configurations of the universe no longer exist; they have evolved into our current specific configuration, i.e., into our current specific moment in time.

"The moving finger writes; and having writ

Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit

Shall lure it back to cancel half a line,

Nor all your tears Wash out a Word of it."

-- From The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam

JCNS

Dear Harri and J.C.N.,

Thank you both for your insightful and thoughtful comments. Your perspectives provide an invaluable opportunity to clarify and expand upon the foundations of my work on time reversal, entropy constancy, and the profound implications they hold for both science and spirituality.

To Harri Shore:

1. Scaling to Macroscopic Systems Your concern regarding the scalability of time reversal from microscopic quantum systems to macroscopic environments is crucial and well-founded. My research establishes that entropy constancy and time symmetry are universal principles. While the complexity of macroscopic systems introduces challenges, these are not insurmountable.

Building on recent experiments with IBM’s quantum computers, which successfully demonstrated time reversal in qubit systems, I propose a phased approach to scalability:

• Phase 1: Controlled systems with minimal degrees of freedom, such as molecular ensembles or localised physical systems, where entropy stabilisation can be achieved.
• Phase 2: Advances in quantum computing and materials science, including self-healing materials and reversible biological processes, which mimic macroscopic time reversal in specific contexts.
• Phase 3: Larger-scale systems where entropy management techniques, such as quasi-adiabatic isolation and advanced thermodynamic controls, enable broader applications.

While we are at the threshold of these advancements, the roadmap is clear, and each incremental success brings us closer to achieving macroscopic time reversal.

2. Experimental Validation Empirical validation is the backbone of scientific progress. My theory provides precise predictions that can be tested experimentally, such as:

• Quantum Entropy Stabilisation: Isolating systems in quasi-adiabatic conditions and observing entropy constancy over extended durations.
• Material Reversibility: Demonstrating the reversal of damage in self-healing materials under controlled conditions.
• Biological Regeneration: Testing time-reversal analogs in biological systems, such as restoring cellular states in stem cell experiments.

These experiments are not merely speculative but are grounded in existing technologies and methodologies, providing a practical framework for validation.

3. Complexity of Real-World Applications The leap from theoretical constructs to practical interventions, such as reversing ecological damage or diseases, requires technological advancements in entropy control. However, the principles are already evident in nature. For example, biological regeneration and molecular self-assembly illustrate processes that align with entropy reversal. By harnessing these phenomena, we can transition from localized to system-wide applications, bridging the gap between theory and real-world impact.

4. Cosmological and Metaphysical Aspects Your point on aligning with established cosmological models is appreciated. My work complements frameworks like Penrose’s Conformal Cyclic Cosmology by addressing the entropy paradox and providing a mechanism for time symmetry at the cosmological level. The pre-Big Bang state, as described in my research, aligns with the concept of a timeless, spaceless origin where conventional physical laws dissolve. This is not speculative but an extension of the mathematical consistency demonstrated in my paper, providing a bridge between cosmology and quantum mechanics.

To J. C. N. Smith:

Precise Definitions of Time Your definition of time as a sequence of configurations in the universe aligns closely with my framework. I extend this by proposing that time is a manifestation of entropy changes, and when entropy remains constant, time becomes reversible. This is not merely a theoretical abstraction but a measurable phenomenon, as demonstrated in recent quantum experiments.

Time Reversal and Past Configurations While reverting the entire universe to a past state may be beyond current capabilities, my work focuses on localised systems where specific configurations can be restored. For instance:

• In a biological system, restoring entropy to a prior state could reverse disease progression or tissue damage. There are documented cases in medical history where diseases have been reversed and organs have been restored to their previous states, sometimes even better than before. These examples are not fiction but reality—a testament to the potential of entropy manipulation and time reversal.
• In ecological systems, controlling entropy could enable the restoration of degraded environments. Just as the human body can regenerate damaged cells, nature can also be treated as a complex system capable of self-restoration. By applying entropy control principles, we can return ecosystems to their original balance or even enhance them.

Furthermore, this principle is not limited to biology or ecology. Stars on a collision course, natural depreciation, degradation, and atrophy—all can be reversed by realigning their entropy states. Theoretically, this approach could allow systems to return to their original conditions or even better states, maintaining stability indefinitely. This is not speculation; it is a scientifically grounded possibility.

Your quote from The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam eloquently captures the traditional understanding of time’s irreversibility. My work challenges this notion by introducing the concept of localized reversibility. Time, as we perceive it, is not an immutable one-way flow but a dynamic property of entropy. By redefining time in this way, we open the door to new possibilities in science, philosophy, and spirituality.

To complement your poetic reference, I offer this updated perspective:

"The moving finger writes; and having writ Moves on: but not your Piety but your Wit alone Shall lure it back to cancel not half but all the lines, But for all your tears, your Goodness can Wash out every Word of it." — From Sandeep Jaiswal

This reimagining captures the essence of localized reversibility—where time’s imprint is not absolute but amendable under the right conditions.

Modern Science vs. Spiritual and God Science

While modern science has achieved remarkable progress, it is, at best, only partially true. I estimate that the accuracy of modern sciences—including physics, biology, law sciences, cooking sciences, music sciences—is only 30-50%, or even less. These sciences are often built on foundations that are fundamentally flawed or incomplete. They provide practical benefits but fail to grasp the ultimate truths of existence.

In contrast, spiritual science constantly seeks the ultimate truth. It aligns itself with universal principles and is therefore correct most of the time. However, even spiritual science pales in comparison to what I term “God science.” God science is the originator of all other sciences, including spiritual sciences, and is 100% true at all times. It transcends human perception and operates in perfect harmony with the ultimate truth of creation and existence.

Modern science, while initially rejecting such perspectives, is slowly evolving from agnosticism toward theism. The growing acknowledgment of metaphysical principles within scientific discourse indicates that science is inching closer to understanding the divine underpinnings of reality. However, true enlightenment can only be achieved by surrendering to God, believing in Him, and trusting in His universal truths. This may seem like a philosophy rejected by contemporary science, but it is steadily gaining acceptance as we uncover deeper layers of existence.

Time reversal is not merely a scientific breakthrough; it is a paradigm shift that unifies science and spirituality. While quantum mechanics provides the mathematical and empirical foundation, spiritual science offers a broader perspective, envisioning realms where time and space dissolve entirely.

In the realm of metaphysics, time can be reversed in any direction, within any system, and for anything imaginable—or even unimaginable. It operates as a form of pure magic that transcends the limitations of modern science. To contemporary physicists, this may seem like an unattainable science beyond science, but ancient civilizations, particularly in India, mastered these principles long before they were relegated to mythology. What modern science achieves in controlled environments feels primitive when compared to the spiritual realm, where time manipulation is a natural phenomenon, boundless and unrestricted by entropy.

In the timeless, spaceless state described in my work, causality itself is redefined. This aligns with metaphysical principles, suggesting that time, as a construct, emerges from deeper, universal truths. Beyond this lies what I call “God’s science,” a domain where creation and destruction operate outside conventional time. Bridging these perspectives allows us to explore not only the mechanics of time reversal but its ultimate purpose and meaning.

Time reversal, once considered impossible, is now a scientifically validated and philosophically transformative concept. My research provides the theoretical and experimental foundation for understanding time as a reversible property of entropy. While challenges remain in scaling and validation, the path forward is clear.

This work invites us to transcend traditional boundaries, integrating physical laws with metaphysical insights to unlock the true nature of time and reality. It is not just a scientific revolution but a spiritual awakening, offering humanity the tools to reshape the future—and even the past.

Thank you both for your valuable contributions to this dialogue. I look forward to further advancing these ideas together.

Best regards, Sandeep Jaiswal

Dear Sandeep Jaiswal and Harri Shore

Thank you both for your constructive comments. And, Sandeep, thank you for your clever rendition of the lines from The Rubaiyt of Omar Khayyam.

I have no doubt that you are sincere in your dedication to your research on time reversal, Sandeep, but I fear that your introduction of spirituality into the mix distracts from the credibility of your science. Science and spirituality tend to make uncomfortable bedfellows, at best.

You wrote: "To contemporary physicists, this may seem like an unattainable science beyond science, but ancient civilizations, particularly in India, mastered these principles long before they were relegated to mythology." With all due respect, however, if ancient civilizations had mastered these principles, why did they not use them to turn our world into an eternal paradise? Sadly, I fear that the world we see now falls far short of what many of us would consider to be a paradise.

In case you may not be aware of it, there is another discussion group at ResearchGate that goes by the title "Can philosophy help to innovate and develop scientific theory?" I can't help wondering whether your mix of science and spirituality might find a more comfortable fit on that discussion group? Regardless, I wish you well with your work on time reversal.

Best Regards,

JCNS