Prologue: how Dijkgraaf tells it

In the episode of NRC Onbehaarde Apen of 24 June 2026, Robbert Dijkgraaf attempts to explain quantum mechanics. The title — ‘we understand even less about it now’ — is not a joke but a diagnosis. Dijkgraaf, whom few can equal in making physics accessible, has to admit honestly at the end of an hour that the theory does calculate, but does not understand. It is correct to twelve decimal places and at the same time defies every attempt to say what it actually describes.

Dijkgraaf knows this pattern. In his lectures and interviews — at Ecosofie, in Quanta Magazine, in the Robbert special of the Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Natuurkunde — he likes to outline how physics develops in leaps. At the beginning of the twentieth century, anomalies in classical physics were piling up: black-body radiation, the photoelectric effect, atomic stability. Newton and Maxwell could not cope with them. In 1900, Planck performed a ‘revolutionary mathematical trick’ by assuming that radiation came in packets (nl.wikipedia.org — Paradigm), and that marked the beginning of the quantum revolution. What initially seemed like an emergency measure became a new paradigm.

Thomas Kuhn described this pattern in *The Structure of Scientific Revolutions*: paradigms remain in place as long as their anomalies can be resolved with minor adjustments; when too many accumulate, the model begins to crack and a leap follows (Physics World on Kuhn). The transition from classical to quantum physics is the prime example.

The anomalies of 2026

Quantum mechanics is not in crisis because it is wrong. It is in crisis because it is too successful and, at the same time, fundamentally incomplete. Four open wounds, exactly as I identified them earlier in the [article about Dijkgraaf in 4D](artikel_dijkgraaf_4d.md):

1. Quantisation is still a postulate. Planck’s constant is built into the theory as an assumption, not as a consequence.

1. Superposition and collapse have no mechanism. Copenhagen, many-worlds, decoherence — they are interpretations, not explanations.

1. Entanglement remains ‘spooky’. The correlations have been measured; the causality is absent.

1. The observer has no place. Consciousness sits at the centre of the formula without being in the formula.

On top of this, cosmological anomalies are accumulating in 2026, making the Kuhnian sequence of crisis unmistakable:

• Dark energy appears to be evolving. The DESI results of 2025 and 2026 show that the cosmological constant Λ may not be a constant at all (Fermilab, January 2026; phys.org, March 2026). The Lambda-CDM model is ‘showing cracks’ (Frontier, March 2026).

• Dark matter has not been found after 60 years. Not a single proposed particle — WIMPs, axions, sterile neutrinos — has been detected.

• Erik Verlinde and others question gravity as a fundamental force. In Scientias, Verlinde states literally: ‘I think we are on the eve of a scientific revolution.’

• String theory needs 10 or 11 dimensions even to be mathematically consistent. AdS-CFT shows that a universe with gravity is mathematically equivalent to a boundary theory without gravity with one fewer dimension (Papilov 2026).

• Loop quantum gravity postulates that space itself has an atomic structure (Wikipedia — LQG).

The message from all these fronts is the same: **the current 4D model is cracking at every seam**. Each subfield has devised its own rescue — extra dimensions, holography, emergence, spin networks — and none of these rescues is universal. That is precisely the Kuhnian foreshadowing of a paradigm shift.

The structure of the leap

Dijkgraaf often describes the transition from classical to quantum physics as an expansion, not a replacement. Classical physics is not wrong; it is the large-scale limit of something broader. Newton remains correct as long as you do not go too small.

The same step now lies before us again, but along a different axis. Quantum theory is not wrong; it is the 4D projection of something that exists in more dimensions. That is the core proposition of the 7-dim framework:

• Space (x, y, z) and time (t) remain as four classical axes.

• G — magnitude, scale acceleration — adds discrete depth.

• W — value, from antimatter to matter, from coherence to dissolution — adds distribution.

• N — plurality, the index of universes via black holes — adds unity across distance.

The leap is not to abandon quantum mechanics. The leap is to recognise that quantum mechanics is the shadow of a seven-dimensional object. After all, what Planck did when he postulated packets was also a description of a shadow. Now we place the source of the shadow alongside it.

The four walls, demolished

Wall 1 — Quantisation

Problem in 4D: why does energy come in discrete steps? Planck’s constant is a given, not a consequence.

Solution in 7D: G is not continuous. The elementary step along the G-axis is Planck’s constant:

mathith equiv Delta_mathitG

Quantisation is then not a postulate but the projection of G-granularity into 4D. What we call ‘a quantum’ is one step along the fifth dimension.

E = h·ν becomes simple: energy is the number of G-steps per unit of t. And because the site states that mathitm_texteff propto mathitG and mathitc_texteff = mathitc_0/sqrt|mathitG| (7-dim.com), E = mc² follows automatically — mass–energy equivalence is simply the sign of the G-axis.

Wall 2 — Superposition and collapse

Problem in 4D: a particle is in several states at once until someone looks. No one knows what ‘looking’ does.

Solution in 7D: a superposition is a state spread *along the W-axis*. Our 4D instruments project the W-distribution onto a single W-coordinate and see several possibilities stacked together. A measurement is nothing more than a W-coupling between apparatus and object; ‘collapse’ is the geometrical observation that a projection returns one value.

No mysticism, no special collapse rule: simply what a shadow does.

Wall 3 — Entanglement

Problem in 4D: two particles affect each other faster than light can travel. Einstein called it ‘spooky’.

Solution in 7D: two entangled particles are one object with the same N-coordinate. Spatial distance exists only in (x, y, z). Along N there is no distance. Nothing therefore travels — there is one seven-dimensional entity visible in two places in the 3D projection.

This ties directly into the holographic principle: information in the interior of a region is fully encoded on the boundary. In 7D terms: N-unity turns ‘distance’ into a projection artefact.

Wall 4 — The observer

Problem in 4D: consciousness sits at the heart of measurement but has no place in the formula.

Solution in 7D: consciousness lies on the W-axis. The site literally states that W places ‘consciousness and ethics on the same coordinate system as atoms and galaxies’ (7-dim.com). An observer is a system with a W-coordinate; a measurement is a W-coupling. No additional rule, no philosophical embarrassment — the same geometry.

What others are doing — and why 7D is simpler

This paradigm shift is being sensed in various ways by established physics. Each of the major contemporary programmes is a partial answer to precisely the same questions. It is worth comparing them:

String theory and M-theory

String theory needs 10 or 11 dimensions (IAS — Dijkgraaf on Quantum Mathematics). Six of these are ‘curled up’ in Calabi–Yau varieties so small that we cannot see them. The theory produces a landscape of 10⁵⁰⁰ possible universes and thereby becomes difficult to falsify.

7D reading: string theory is right to sense that extra dimensions are needed. It merely overestimates their number and hides them at excessively small scales. The three extra axes are not curled-up Calabi–Yau spaces; they are G, W and N — physically observable in mass, superposition and entanglement. Where string theory gives 10⁵⁰⁰ universes, N gives them a concrete structure: every black hole is a universe. This is falsifiable through black-hole observations.

Loop quantum gravity (LQG)

LQG postulates that space itself has an atomic structure, built from spin networks at the Planck scale (Wikipedia — LQG).

7D reading: LQG is right to sense that there is discreteness. But the discreteness is not in space (x, y, z); it is in G. What LQG calls ‘atoms of space’ are G-steps that project onto spatial measurements. The theory describes the shadow of quantisation on the x-axis, while quantisation itself exists on the G-axis.

Holographic principle / AdS-CFT

Maldacena showed that a universe with gravity is equivalent to a quantum field theory on the boundary with one fewer dimension (Papilov 2026).

7D interpretation: a beautiful indication that dimensions are not what they seem. In 7D terms: information exists across N. What the boundary encodes is not a dimension-reduced version; it is the same 7D entity viewed through a different projection. AdS-CFT is a special case of the broader 7D symmetry.

Verlinde's entropic gravity

Erik Verlinde proposes that gravity is not a fundamental force but an emergent phenomenon arising from information in spacetime — and that this makes dark matter redundant (Scientias 2016).

7D interpretation: Verlinde is fundamentally right that dark matter is not an exotic particle. In 7D, it is ordinary matter at a different W-value — invisible to our detectors but nevertheless gravitationally active. Where Verlinde looks for information in spacetime, 7D places information along W. Both are solutions that require no new particles.

Dark-dimension scenario

Quanta Magazine reported in June 2026 on a “dark dimension” that could link dark matter and dark energy (Quanta, June 2026).

7D interpretation: the suspected “dark dimension” is precisely W. Dark matter and dark energy are not coincidentally explained by it; they are two projections of the same W-distribution — matter at a different W-value (invisible) and the measurement artefact of variable G (apparently accelerated expansion).

DESI and evolving dark energy

DESI 2025–2026 shows that dark energy changes over time (Fermilab; phys.org).

7D interpretation: naturally, it changes. The site states mathitc_texteff = mathitc_0/sqrt|mathitG|. If G varies locally and cosmologically, c varies, measured distance varies, and “accelerated expansion” appears as a measurement artefact. Precisely what David Wiltshire suggests when he says that dark energy may be “a misinterpretation” of non-uniform expansion (Scientias 2024).

Overview

Phenomenon	4D quantum theory (2026)	String theory / LQG / AdS-CFT / Verlinde	7D framework
Quantisation	Postulate (Planck's h)	LQG: discrete atoms of space	Elementary G-step: h ≡ ΔG
Superposition	Amplitudes, no mechanism	Decoherence (partial)	Distribution along the W-axis
Collapse	Unexplained	Many-worlds (10500 branches)	W-projection onto observer-W
Entanglement	Non-local, spooky	AdS-CFT: boundary encoding	One object with shared N
Observer	Philosophical problem	Unresolved	W-coupling
Dark matter	Undetectable particle	Verlinde: emergent	Matter at another W
Dark energy	Λ-constant that is not constant	Wiltshire: measurement artefact	Consequence of variable G and ceff
Extra dimensions	None	String theory: 6 compactified	G, W, N — physically observable
Black holes	Singularity, information paradox	AdS-CFT: boundary encoding	G < 0, every black hole = a new universe (N)
Gravity	Fundamental force	Verlinde: emergent from information	Emergent from a G-gradient
Multiple universes	Speculative	String-theory landscape (10500)	Structural through N
Consciousness	Not in scope	Not in scope	On the W-axis, equal in status to matter

What stands out is that almost every modern theory is a partially correct intuition formulated within 4D. String theory senses the extra dimensions. LQG senses quantisation. AdS-CFT senses dimensional reduction. Verlinde senses emergence. Wiltshire senses the measurement artefact of dark energy. Each is right about one part. The 7D framework places their pieces side by side and sees that they are the same three extra axes, encountered time and again from a different angle.

The methodological gain

Kuhn argued that paradigms are incommensurable and that we should speak not of progress but of replacement (nl.wikipedia.org — Paradigm). Yet he allowed one exception: if the new paradigm adds explanatory power — if it solves all the old problems and adds a few new ones — then one may speak of progress.

Test 7D against that criterion:

• All existing quantum puzzles receive a geometrical rather than philosophical explanation.

• String theory's extra dimensions become physically observable rather than compactified.

• Dark matter and dark energy are explained without new particles.

• Consciousness is given a coordinate.

• The computational power of quantum mechanics is retained because 4D is the projection; all successful predictions remain valid.

• And the model is falsifiable: if G, W and N have no measurable effects on fusion, superposition or black-hole signals, it is wrong.

That is precisely what Kuhn called “progress” — and what Dijkgraaf describes as the logic of paradigm shifts: the new framework encompasses the old and more.

Where Dijkgraaf arrives, without saying so

Dijkgraaf says in Quanta Magazine that space and time may not be the most fundamental things in the universe (Quanta, February 2020). In Ecosofie he repeats that science is “never finished” and that theory sometimes runs ahead of experiment (Ecosofie 155). In the podcast with NRC he admits that quantum mechanics remains incomprehensible.

These are not isolated statements. This is a physicist who, from within the dominant theory, is indicating the contours of its successor. He does not say what that successor is — nor can he, as long as he remains within his own 4D language. But the form he points towards — a framework in which space and time are emergent, in which dimensions are more than we can see, in which collapse is not a physical process but a projection — is exactly the form of 7D.

The podcast describes, without intending to, precisely the paradigm that is on the verge of breaking through. And the title — “we understand even less of it now” — is not the end of the story. It is the moment just before a new one begins.

Epilogue

Just as Newton was expanded by Einstein and Bohr, so Bohr is now expanded by three dimensions into which he could not look. Quantisation, superposition, entanglement and measurement are not four fundamental riddles; they are four symptoms of the same geometrical poverty — a 7D reality forced into a 4D jacket.

That is the promise of 7-dim.com, and that is — if you listen carefully to Dijkgraaf — the direction in which he has long been pointing without naming it.