Популярно о конечной математике и ее интересных применениях в квантовой теории

Dear Professor Iosevich,

You are a member of the arXiv Math Advisory Committee, and I would be grateful for your advice on my problems with arXiv.

I have many papers published in known journals, 49 papers in arXiv, and Springer published my monograph: Finite Mathematics as the Foundation of Classical Mathematics and Quantum Theory. With Application to Gravity and Particle theory. ISBN 978–3–030–61101–9. Springer, https://www.springer.com/us/book/9783030611002 (2020). More detailed information about me can be found in my ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000–0002–4476–3080.

My main area of research is quantum theory based on finite rings or fields. So, arXiv treated my papers as belonging to physics. Before 2009 they placed my papers in sections which I proposed. However, then their attitude to my papers significantly changed. They often required that my papers can be posted only after publications in known journals, and this, obviously, contradicts the very meaning of arXiv. However, even when a paper was published, they placed it in physics.gen-ph and several of my papers were rejected altogether. The only exception was that in 2012 they agreed to reclassify my paper published in Physical Review D to hep-th. It is obvious that quantum theory based on finite mathematics has nothing to do with general physics. I wrote many appeals but typically they were ignored.

I worked with physicists for many years and know their way of thinking. Unfortunately, when many physicists see a paper with mathematics which they don’t know, they immediately conclude that this is pathology or exotics which has nothing to do with physics. Most physicists are not familiar even with the very basics of finite mathematics. This is not a drawback because everybody knows something and does not know something, and it’s impossible to know everything. But typically, those physicists do not accept that in science different approaches should be allowed.

My understanding is that the goal of arXiv is to let scientists know what other scientists are doing. But in my case, the impression is that their goal is the opposite. The matter is that if a paper is posted in gen-ph then it is not allowed to cross-list the paper to other sections, and physicists and mathematicians interested in quantum theory over finite mathematics do not go to gen-ph.

Let me describe two latest examples.

My paper “Discussion of foundation of mathematics and quantum theory” published in Open Mathematics https://doi.org/10.1515/math-2022–0011 is in fact a popular description of some results of my book. I requested to post this paper in quant-ph and math.HO. However, they again posted the paper in gen-ph although it is obvious that the problems of foundation of mathematics and quantum theory have nothing to do with general physics. I wrote an appeal and after a month they informed me that they reclassified the paper to physics.gen-ph quant-ph. So, they refused to reclassify the paper to math.HO, and the paper was not posted in sections new and recent of quant-ph. Moreover, since the primary section is still gen-ph, I have no right to cross-list the paper to other sections.

Another example is the following. I had a talk "Obtaining information about nature with finite mathematics" at the international online conference organized by known universities, in particular by UCLA. The talk was published in Proceedings, MDPI, 2022, 81 (1), pp.8.

10.3390/proceedings2022081008. Nevertheless, arXiv rejected my submission with the following motivation: "Thank you for submitting your work to arXiv. We regret to inform you that arXiv’s moderators have determined that your submission will not be accepted and made public; Our moderators determined that your submission does not contain sufficient original or substantive scholarly research and is not of interest to arXiv. " This motivation is given without any explanation and has no hint that the moderators tried to understand the submission or were able to understand. It also contradicts their rules that the moderators are not referees. And the phrase that the submission is not of interest to arXiv contradicts scientific ethics because if the moderators do not understand the submission, it does not mean that it is not of interest for arXiv readers. Fortunately, I have no problems with the French archive HAL and here it is posted as https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03605174.

In summary, the attitude of arXiv to my submissions fully contradicts scientific ethics and does not give a hint that they understand what the submissions are about.

I would be grateful if you tell me about your opinion on whether it is possible to convince the moderators that their decisions are not based on scientific criteria, and they should be reconsidered.

Thank you.

Sincerely, Felix Lev.