How Similarity Theory Explains the Major Scientific Puzzles

A Science Page of Similarity Theory
By Simon Raphael

This page addresses how Similarity Theory approaches several unresolved scientific puzzles by reframing time, observation, and structure through relational continuity.

1. Canonical Summary

Similarity Theory is a novel framework that reconceptualises foundational scientific questions by prioritising the structural principles of continuity, selection and relational similarity across scales of existence. Rather than assuming time as a background parameter or consciousness as derivative, it treats frames of existence as fundamental and explores how these frames generate ordered phenomena through similarity-attraction and relational unfolding. This unified perspective offers coherent explanations for long-standing puzzles — from the arrow of time and entropy, through quantum measurement and fine-tuning, to the nature of dark matter/energy and the alignment problem in artificial intelligence — without sacrificing scientific rigour or empirical grounding.

2. Introduction

The scientific enterprise has succeeded in mapping an extraordinary range of phenomena, yet it continues to grapple with enduring puzzles: why does time seem to have a direction, why is the universe finely tuned for complexity, what underlies quantum measurement, and how can intelligence be aligned with human values? Traditional frameworks, whether purely physicalist, information-theoretic or reductionist, face limitations when applied to such wide-ranging questions.

Similarity Theory offers a coherent approach that does not discard the substantial progress of established science but reframes these puzzles in terms of relational structures, continuity of existence and the generative role of similarity across scales. The purpose of this page is not to replace existing theories but to map how Similarity Theory interprets and integrates answers to these major scientific puzzles.

3. Foundational Concepts

To understand how these problems are approached, it is essential to briefly articulate the central concepts of Similarity Theory:

• Frames of Time: Rather than viewing time as a background parameter, this framework treats frames as basic units of existence — complete state-descriptions from which ordered sequences emerge via relational transitions.

• Relational Continuity and Similarity: Existence unfolds by transitions that preserve structural similarity, generating directionality and coherence without appealing to external time or privileged observers.

• Scale-Dependent Rule Sets: Different domains of existence (e.g., inanimate matter, biological life, conscious agency) are governed by distinct rule sets, but all are expressions of the same underlying structural principles.

By establishing these principles, Similarity Theory creates a consistent terrain on which scientific puzzles can be reframed and re-examined.

4. The Arrow of Time and Entropy

One of the most persistent questions in physics is the arrow of time: why do processes appear to unfold in a single direction, even when fundamental laws are time-symmetric?

In mainstream thermodynamics, this is often attributed to entropy and initial conditions. However, the explanation remains conceptually incomplete, especially when linking microscopic reversibility to macroscopic irreversibility.

Similarity Theory’s perspective:

• Directionality emerges from relational continuity across frames.

• Frames do not simply succeed one another; they do so by similarity-guided selection, which manifests as an apparent temporal gradient.

• Entropy, therefore, is not merely disorder but an expression of the structural relationships that persist across frames, giving rise to distinguishable directions of change.

For a detailed treatment, see: Arrow of Time or Similarity Theory and Entropy and Order in Similarity Theory.

5. Quantum Measurement and Observation

The measurement problem in quantum physics arises from the difficulty of reconciling unitary evolution with definite outcomes during observation.

Traditional interpretations either posit collapse (Copenhagen), many worlds, or rely on decoherence without clear ontological commitments.

Similarity Theory reframes this as:

• A structural transition among frames where relational similarity generates outcomes that are locally definite without requiring an external observer as a fundamental entity.

• Observation becomes an expression of structural alignment — not an ad hoc collapse — rooted in the same continuity principles that characterise all frames.

Linked pages: Observer Effect | Quantum Measurement Problem.

6. Fine Tuning, Dark Matter, and Dark Energy

Cosmology offers deep puzzles: the universe’s physical constants appear finely tuned for complexity; dark matter and dark energy dominate the cosmic budget without direct detection.

Similarity Theory suggests:

• Fine tuning reflects deep structural coherence across scales; constants are not arbitrary but emerge from relational constraints that maximise continuity of states.

• The phenomena attributed to dark matter and dark energy may be manifestations of higher-order relational similarity operating beyond conventional metric descriptions.

Relevant sections: Fine Tuning Problem in Similarity Theory | Dark Matter and Dark Energy.

7. Patterns, Scale, and Mathematical Structure

Beyond specific physical problems, Similarity Theory emphasises structural patterns — fractals, invariances, and recursive similarity — as organising principles.

• Fractals and similarity demonstrate how complex structures arise from simple generative rules.

• Holography vs similarity explores how structural information may be embedded across domains without reliance on a specific physical medium.

• Numbers and algebraic structure provide a language for formalising similarity transitions across frames.

See: Fractals and Similarity, Holographic Universe vs Similarity Theory, Similarity Theory Numbers.

8. The Alignment Problem

In artificial intelligence, the alignment problem concerns how to ensure that intelligent systems behave in ways that are compatible with human values.

Similarity Theory places this puzzle within a broader structural context:

• Alignment is not merely optimisation but the capacity for nested systems to maintain relational similarity with chosen regulatory principles across frames.

• Human values, therefore, are not arbitrary targets but structural attractors within a space of coherent transitions.

The relevant discussion can be found at The Alignment Problem.

10. Interpretive Boundaries

It is crucial to be transparent about what Similarity Theory is and is not:

Similarity Theory is
✔ A coherent structural perspective
✔ A unifying framework for cross-scale questions
✔ Compatible with scientific investigation

Similarity Theory is not
✘ A replacement for empirical science
✘ A claim that current measurements are incorrect
✘ A simplistic alternative to established physics

Rather, it synthesises — offering coherent explanations that respect empirical constraints yet extend interpretive reach.

11. Closing Thoughts

The major scientific puzzles — from time’s arrow to cosmic structure and intelligent alignment — share a common feature: they mingle levels of description in ways that resist simple reduction. Similarity Theory offers a way to see these puzzles not as disconnected anomalies, but as expressions of relational continuity and structural similarity across scales. By foregrounding this architecture, the theory situates scientific inquiry on a landscape where coherence comes before reduction, and structure precedes protocausal ambiguity.