Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 114 (8796 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-24-2017 7:22 AM
376 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 375 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Upcoming Birthdays: DrJones*, willietern
Post Volume:
Total: 821,131 Year: 25,737/21,208 Month: 1,364/2,338 Week: 121/364 Day: 9/63 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
23Next
Author Topic:   Have quantum interpretations been experimentally verified?
Percy
Member
Posts: 16041
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 1 of 42 (785459)
06-05-2016 9:59 AM


"New evidence could break the standard view of quantum mechanics," says a headline at Science Alert. I wasn't sure what to think, so I began the thread, Article About New Developments in Quantum Mechanics. There were good responses, and Son Goku said that possibly there was something worth discussing, hence this thread proposal.

Son Goku explained that both the standard and Bohmian versions of quantum mechanics yield the same experimental results regarding quantum uncertainty (as phrased in the article, "particles don't have a location until they're observed"), and that the only way to distinguish between the two was to observe the trajectories suggested by the Bohmian model. The experiment described in the article suggests that such trajectories may have been observed, with the emphasis on "may." Son Goku questions how much weight should be given the experiment's use of "weak measurements," and the article echoes this when it says:

quote:
So let's step back for a second here and break this down. First thing's first, this is just one study, and A LOT more replication and verification would be needed before the standard view comes crumbling down. So don't go burning any text books just yet, okay? Good.

Particle trajectories seems to me an incredibly obscure subject of discussion, but as the article describes the implications are dramatic, for if the Bohmian model is correct it means that particles *do* have precise locations. Success of the Bohmian model would also mean that nonlocality is true, meaning that everything in the universe is always affected by everything else in the universe, no matter how far apart, which would have implications for our interpretation of what Einstein called, "spooky action at a distance," what we observe as quantum entanglement.

According to the article the Bohmiam view fell into disfavor when a 1992 study found that it required outlandish particle trajectories, but this new study suggests that because of nonlocality the information about trajectories is not reliable.

The article doesn't describe the actual experimental results. The paper itself, Experimental nonlocal and surreal Bohmian trajectories, is a bit above my pay grade. I'd like to see someone more qualified tackle it first, but I'll wade in on my own if necessary.

Usually threads about quantum mechanics go in Big Bang and Cosmology.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Clarify.


    
AdminAsgara
Administrator
Posts: 2073
From: The Universe
Joined: 10-11-2003


Message 2 of 42 (785461)
06-05-2016 1:15 PM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Have quantum interpretations been experimentally verified? thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
AlexCaledin
Junior Member
Posts: 14
From: Samara, Russia
Joined: 10-22-2016


Message 3 of 42 (793207)
10-24-2016 8:42 AM


To me, the two main quantum interpretations are the classical Copenhagen and the Everettian Many worlds. And the problem is not how to verify one of them but how to see them reconciled.

Dr. Henry Stapp's writings are extremely interesting. He seems to prove, analyzing the brain research, that the quantum choice is coming "from nowhere", from some transcendent "world of mind". So, according to his worldview, the Physical Reality is no more than "structure of tendencies/probabilities within the world of mind".

That Structure is what the quantum theory, when applied to the whole universe, calculate — the abstract "Tree" of branching Everettian universes. But they are potential, not actual. The "world of mind" is busy making actual choice each moment.

Thinking of that, I can't help remembering the Tree of Game in the mathematical Game Theory - where every game is seen as the process of the branch choice; and also these Richard Feynman's words:

"physics, or rather nature, is considered analogous to a great chess game... The great gods who play this chess play it very rapidly..."

So, the physical reality is the Great Game played by some spiritual entities!
The human consciousness is among those Players; it's attached to the brain, performing the quantum choice of the actual thought for this moment.
This seems explaining everything. The classic wavefunction becomes a Tree's branch, the Collapse — a move of the Game, the Born Rule — a rule of the game that maintains seemingly independent macroscopic reality.

So the Creation must now be seen as the First Move of the Game, the Choice of good Nature, chosen, and made real, by God. Before it was chosen, Nature was a potential outcome of an abstract evolution. God's Creative Act(s) made the Nature, with the evidence of Evolution, real — leaving its Evolution unreal!

Edited by AlexCaledin, : No reason given.

Edited by AlexCaledin, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-24-2016 11:41 AM AlexCaledin has responded
 Message 5 by PaulK, posted 10-24-2016 11:50 AM AlexCaledin has not yet responded
 Message 8 by Percy, posted 10-24-2016 1:22 PM AlexCaledin has not yet responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15963
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 4 of 42 (793228)
10-24-2016 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by AlexCaledin
10-24-2016 8:42 AM


God's Creative Act(s) made the Nature, with the evidence of Evolution, real — leaving its Evolution unreal!

But would we not then have to believe that God's choice was to show us a lie?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by AlexCaledin, posted 10-24-2016 8:42 AM AlexCaledin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by AlexCaledin, posted 10-25-2016 5:00 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 13233
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 5 of 42 (793229)
10-24-2016 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by AlexCaledin
10-24-2016 8:42 AM


quote:

Dr. Henry Stapp's writings are extremely interesting. He seems to prove, analyzing the brain research, that the quantum choice is coming "from nowhere", from some transcendent "world of mind".

Surely brain research could only show that the "choice" (if there is one - I would think that the "many-worlds" interpretation denies it) does not come from the brain. Which would hardly surprise those who think that it has nothing to do with the mind at all.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by AlexCaledin, posted 10-24-2016 8:42 AM AlexCaledin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-24-2016 11:59 AM PaulK has responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15963
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 6 of 42 (793231)
10-24-2016 11:59 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by PaulK
10-24-2016 11:50 AM


I didn't follow that at all.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by PaulK, posted 10-24-2016 11:50 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by PaulK, posted 10-24-2016 12:08 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 13233
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 7 of 42 (793233)
10-24-2016 12:08 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Dr Adequate
10-24-2016 11:59 AM


If the "choice" is what is more often called "collapse" then:

If "many-worlds" is true every possible outcome happens so there is nothing that could be called a "choice"

Brain research can only show that the presumed "choice" is or is not caused by something in the brain. If it shows "not" then I cannot see how we can jump to a cause coming from "some transcendent world of mind". Not when we don't know that there is a cause or even a "choice". Brain research in itself cannot even rule out causes outside the brain.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-24-2016 11:59 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by AlexCaledin, posted 10-25-2016 6:52 AM PaulK has responded
 Message 15 by NoNukes, posted 10-25-2016 3:29 PM PaulK has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16041
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 8 of 42 (793235)
10-24-2016 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by AlexCaledin
10-24-2016 8:42 AM


AlexCaledin writes:

Dr. Henry Stapp's writings are extremely interesting. He seems to prove, analyzing the brain research, that the quantum choice is coming "from nowhere", from some transcendent "world of mind". So, according to his worldview, the Physical Reality is no more than "structure of tendencies/probabilities within the world of mind".

So as a receiver enters the end zone while the football descends into his outstretched hands before 70,000 onlookers, what is going on in all their worlds of mind? Is there a negotiation? Is there a branching of realities into "touchdown," "incompletion, "under review," and all possibilities in between? Something else?

To me such ideas seem the kind of typical anthropocentric claptrap we humans are so prone to, as if nothing ever happened (no wave functions collapsed) until we humans developed consciousness.

This thread's actually about whether particles *do* have precise locations. At the time I proposed this thread I was all primed, locked and loaded to discuss the topic, but I can't maintain readiness for months on topics that are at the limits of my understanding, even on a good day. I'd have to reread everything before I could be ready to discuss and misunderstand this topic again, and if anyone is interested then I'll do that.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by AlexCaledin, posted 10-24-2016 8:42 AM AlexCaledin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Son Goku, posted 10-26-2016 7:25 PM Percy has not yet responded

    
AlexCaledin
Junior Member
Posts: 14
From: Samara, Russia
Joined: 10-22-2016


Message 9 of 42 (793284)
10-25-2016 5:00 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Dr Adequate
10-24-2016 11:41 AM


"But would we not then have to believe that God's choice was to show us a lie?"

Well, that's the most usual thing I have to hear!

But believers ought to be "Bible-minded" — and Bible definitely says that material, "carnal" things are deceptive and every believer must develop awareness of the spiritual things.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-24-2016 11:41 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Pressie, posted 10-25-2016 7:18 AM AlexCaledin has not yet responded

    
AlexCaledin
Junior Member
Posts: 14
From: Samara, Russia
Joined: 10-22-2016


Message 10 of 42 (793287)
10-25-2016 6:52 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by PaulK
10-24-2016 12:08 PM


«If "many-worlds" is true every possible outcome happens so there is nothing that could be called a "choice"»

— yes I can imagine this for a moment; but soon after that I can't help making actual choices in my life. So, my actual life is somehow outside that abstract Everettian mechanics — and so is the actual life of my neighbors etc. You may of course call it "inside" instead of "outside" — but I believe that God is on my side and we are, spiritually, cannot be inside any mechanics, otherwise it would imply some "many-God" interpretation.

Werner Heisenberg insisted that what QM calculates is the Potentiality — that's where every possible outcome potentially — but not actually — "happens".


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by PaulK, posted 10-24-2016 12:08 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Pressie, posted 10-25-2016 7:12 AM AlexCaledin has not yet responded
 Message 13 by RAZD, posted 10-25-2016 7:35 AM AlexCaledin has responded
 Message 14 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2016 7:51 AM AlexCaledin has responded

    
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1809
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 11 of 42 (793288)
10-25-2016 7:12 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by AlexCaledin
10-25-2016 6:52 AM


Goodness gracious me. With Physics1 and Maths 2 I have no idea what you guys are talking about.

However, my basic training in geology, together with specialising in some form of geology (sedimentolgy), got the result that I'm quite capable of providing relatively accurate predictions on what would be found underground for those minerals I studied. Exploration and mining companies keep on employing me and the research organisation I work for.

Quantum interpretations or not. Aren't you guys just keeping on pulling your own chains?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by AlexCaledin, posted 10-25-2016 6:52 AM AlexCaledin has not yet responded

    
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1809
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 12 of 42 (793289)
10-25-2016 7:18 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by AlexCaledin
10-25-2016 5:00 AM


AlexCaledin writes:

But believers ought to be "Bible-minded"

One of my collegues in the Human Resources Department keeps on telling me that believers ought to be "Quran-minded".
This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by AlexCaledin, posted 10-25-2016 5:00 AM AlexCaledin has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19100
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 13 of 42 (793291)
10-25-2016 7:35 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by AlexCaledin
10-25-2016 6:52 AM


Hi AlexCaledin, and welcome to the fray

«If "many-worlds" is true every possible outcome happens so there is nothing that could be called a "choice"»

... as you are new here, some posting tips:

type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:

quotes are easy

and you can type [qs=RAZD]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:

RAZD writes:

quotes are easy

or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:

quote:
quotes are easy

I like to use this form to quote from articles and the previous for quoting from posts.

also check out (help) links on any formatting questions when in the reply window.

For other formatting tips see Posting Tips
For a quick overview see EvC Forum Primer
If you have problems with replies see Report Discussion Problems Here 3.0

You can also select "Peek Mode" when replying to see how that post was formatted.

— yes I can imagine this for a moment; but soon after that I can't help making actual choices in my life. So, my actual life is somehow outside that abstract Everettian mechanics — and so is the actual life of my neighbors etc. You may of course call it "inside" instead of "outside" — but I believe that God is on my side and we are, spiritually, cannot be inside any mechanics, otherwise it would imply some "many-God" interpretation.

Of course you do, and in the universe next door you welcome that interpretation.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by AlexCaledin, posted 10-25-2016 6:52 AM AlexCaledin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by AlexCaledin, posted 11-13-2016 1:25 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 13233
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 14 of 42 (793293)
10-25-2016 7:51 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by AlexCaledin
10-25-2016 6:52 AM


I don't assume that quantum uncertainty is at all relevant to human choices. You seem to be confusing two different things.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by AlexCaledin, posted 10-25-2016 6:52 AM AlexCaledin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by AlexCaledin, posted 11-13-2016 1:42 PM PaulK has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9998
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 15 of 42 (793317)
10-25-2016 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by PaulK
10-24-2016 12:08 PM


If "many-worlds" is true every possible outcome happens so there is nothing that could be called a "choice"

I think there could still be choice. After all we assume that we are constrained to occupy only one universe at a time. A remaining question might be whether or not our choices matter if all of them are actually made by some version of ourselves.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson

Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by PaulK, posted 10-24-2016 12:08 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2016 4:03 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
1
23Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017