Julius Gomez

In a previous essay we demonstrated that quantum mechanical formalism is incompatible with some necessary principles of the mechanism conception still dominant in the physicist’s community. In this paper we show, based on recent empirical evidence in quantum physics, the inevitability of abandoning the old mechanism conception and to construct a new one in which physical reality is seen as a representation which refers to relations established through operations made by us in a world that we are determining. This change is profound and radical, with immediate consequences on both Ontology and Epistemology. This work is our contribution to try to make more concrete how this new conception of the world might be

The traditional “realist” conception of physics, according to which human concepts, laws and theories can grasp the essence of a reality in our absence , seems incompatible with quantum formalism and it most fruitful interpretation. The proof rests on the violation by quantum mechanical formalism of some fundamental principles of the classical ontology. We discuss if the conception behind Einstein’s idea of a reality in our absence, could be still maintained and at which price. We conclude that quantum mechanical formalism is not formulated on those terms, leaving for a separated paper the discussion about the terms in which it could be formulated and the onto-epistemological implications it might have

Most growth models for complex networks consider networks comprising a single connected block or island, which contains all the nodes in the network. However, it has been demonstrated that some large complex networks have more than one island, with an island size distribution obeying a power-law function Is~s-α. This paper introduces a growth model that considers the emergence of islands as the network grows. The proposed model addresses the following two features: the probability that a new island is generated decreases as the network grows and new islands are created with a constant probability at any stage of the growth. In the first case, the model produces an island size distribution that decays as a power-law Is~s-α with a fixed exponent α=1 and in-degree distribution that decays as a power-law Qi~i-γ with γ=2. When the second case is considered, the model describes island size and in-degree distributions that decay as a power-law with 2