Is This What Quantum Mechanics Looks Like?

Veritasium video - physical realization of pilot wave theories

Study matter and its motion through spacetime...

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Re: Is This What Quantum Mechanics Looks Like?

#21  Postby newolder » Dec 18, 2016 4:12 pm

DavidMcC wrote:
newolder wrote:...

Also, some problems with the theory are noted here.

That isn't entirely fair, newolder, because AFAIK, there is NO theory that fully combines GR with QT, not even QFT.

You can't blame me for that. :crazy:
Geometric forgetting gives me loops. - Nima A-H
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 6544
Age: 8
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Is This What Quantum Mechanics Looks Like?

#22  Postby DavidMcC » Dec 18, 2016 4:18 pm

newolder wrote:
DavidMcC wrote:
newolder wrote:...

Also, some problems with the theory are noted here.

That isn't entirely fair, newolder, because AFAIK, there is NO theory that fully combines GR with QT, not even QFT.

You can't blame me for that. :crazy:

I wasn't trying to! It's just that it isn't fair to Bohm to blame him for a problem that no-one has yet solved.
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14913
Age: 66
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Is This What Quantum Mechanics Looks Like?

#23  Postby newolder » Dec 18, 2016 4:27 pm

DavidMcC wrote:
newolder wrote:
DavidMcC wrote:
newolder wrote:...

Also, some problems with the theory are noted here.

That isn't entirely fair, newolder, because AFAIK, there is NO theory that fully combines GR with QT, not even QFT.

You can't blame me for that. :crazy:

I wasn't trying to! It's just that it isn't fair to Bohm to blame him for a problem that no-one has yet solved.

The link lists 6 problems and references material for further study. Have fun.
Geometric forgetting gives me loops. - Nima A-H
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 6544
Age: 8
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Re: Is This What Quantum Mechanics Looks Like?

#24  Postby DavidMcC » Dec 18, 2016 4:56 pm

newolder wrote:
DavidMcC wrote:
newolder wrote:
DavidMcC wrote:
That isn't entirely fair, newolder, because AFAIK, there is NO theory that fully combines GR with QT, not even QFT.

You can't blame me for that. :crazy:

I wasn't trying to! It's just that it isn't fair to Bohm to blame him for a problem that no-one has yet solved.

The link lists 6 problems and references material for further study. Have fun.

Again, I suspect that this has nothing to do with Bohm. Rather, it may be a kind of straw man interpretation of Bohmian theory.
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14913
Age: 66
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Is This What Quantum Mechanics Looks Like?

#25  Postby newolder » Apr 07, 2018 9:29 am

Another critique of Bohemian Mechanics that is not exhaustive but adequate for purpose:
Geometric forgetting gives me loops. - Nima A-H
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 6544
Age: 8
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Re: Is This What Quantum Mechanics Looks Like?

#26  Postby Calilasseia » Apr 07, 2018 3:36 pm

All of this, of course, leads inexorably to another of those interesting questions. Macroscopic entities and interactions are in accord with a classical mechanical theory, to a high degree of precision. Prior information about a small number of variables is sufficient for us to possess predictive power with respect to the behaviour of a wide range of macroscopic systems. Macroscopic systems therefore present to us, a comforting vision of regularity and order, with relatively few well-documented exceptions. Because we too are macroscopic entities, we have acquired, over time, a preference for seeking relationships of a classical type, because those have been, in the past, the most useful to understand. However, this leads us to ask, by what mechanism does classical order and regularity emerge from a probabilistic quantum foundation?

The data tells us, in no uncertain terms, that said probabilistic quantum foundation is readily observable with the appropriate experimental setup, and is therefore a feature of physics we have to deal with. So how does macroscopic classical behaviour arise from that foundation? I suspect physicists themselves have been pondering this long into the night, but I don't recall seeing a definitive answer on this, which is a question that's far more interesting than anything arising from Bohmian musings.
Signature temporarily on hold until I can find a reliable image host ...
User avatar
Calilasseia
RS Donator
 
Posts: 22011
Age: 57
Male

Country: England
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Is This What Quantum Mechanics Looks Like?

#27  Postby newolder » Apr 07, 2018 4:51 pm

Probably the subject of another topic (this one's about Bohmian Mechanics) but there's a Perimeter Institute video:
IS THE EMERGENCE OF MACROSCOPIC BEHAVIOR DUE TO A QUANTUM MECHANICAL INDETERMINACY OF THE STRUCTURE OF THE EINSTEINIAN SPACE-TIME?
ABSTRACT

According to a widely accepted view, the emergence of macroscopic behavior is related to the loss of quantum mechanical coherence. Opinions on the possible cause of this loss diverge. In the present talk it will be shown how a small, assessable amount of indeterminacy in the structure of space-time may lead to the emergence of macroscopic behavior, in agreement with empirical evidence.


Also, there are no useful classical models for the macroscopic behaviour of superconductors and superfluids - just saying.
Geometric forgetting gives me loops. - Nima A-H
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 6544
Age: 8
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Is This What Quantum Mechanics Looks Like?

#28  Postby DavidMcC » May 04, 2018 2:13 pm

However, this leads us to ask, by what mechanism does classical order and regularity emerge from a probabilistic quantum foundation?

QM wavefunctions have phase as well as amplitude, and it is when the phase of a wavefunction does not get scrambled by thermal vibrations that we can observe quantum effects. This is why very low temperatures are required when atoms are involved (otherwise thermal vibrations smear out the phase so much that it is meaningless to talk of phase). The reason that it is easy to observe such quantum effects with light, and thus observe interference patterns) is the low mass of a photon and thus relatively long wavelengths involved, so that phase is important.
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14913
Age: 66
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Previous

Return to Physics

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest