Even Physicists Don’t Understand Quantum Mechanics
Worse, they don’t seem to want to understand it.
By Sean Carroll
Dr. Carroll is a physicist.
Sept. 7, 2019
====
Physicists don't understand their own theory
any better than a typical smartphone user
understands what’s going on inside the device.
#
There are two problems.
One is the “measurement problem” of quantum theory.
The other problem is ''wave functions''
#
If nobody understands quantum mechanics,
nobody understands the universe.
. . . . .
Few modern physics departments have researchers
working to understand the foundations of quantum theory.
. . .
Physicists brought up in the modern system will
look into your eyes and explain with all sincerity that
they’re not really interested in understanding how
nature really works; they just want to successfully
predict the outcomes of experiments
. . .
In the 1950s the physicist David Bohm, egged on
by Einstein, proposed an ingenious way of augmenting
traditional quantum theory in order to solve the
measurement problem.
Werner Heisenberg, one of the pioneers of quantum
mechanics, responded by labeling the theory
“a superfluous ideological superstructure,” and
Bohm’s former mentor Robert Oppenheimer huffed,
“If we cannot disprove Bohm, then we must agree to ignore him.”
. . . .
A more recent solution to the measurement problem, proposed
by the physicists Giancarlo Ghirardi, Alberto Rimini and
Tulio Weber, is unknown to most physicists.
. . . .
But they have been neglected by most scientists.
For years, the leading journal in physics had an explicit
policy that papers on the foundations of quantum mechanics
were to be rejected out of hand.
. . . .
The situation might be changing, albeit gradually.
. . .
It’s hard to make progress when the data just keep
confirming the theories we have, rather than pointing
toward new ones.
. . . . https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/07/opinion/sunday/quantum-physics.html
====
On Saturday, September 7, 2019 at 10:27:56 AM UTC-7, 44so...@gmail.com wrote:
Even Physicists Don’t Understand Quantum Mechanics
Worse, they don’t seem to want to understand it.
By Sean Carroll
Dr. Carroll is a physicist.
Sept. 7, 2019
====
Physicists don't understand their own theory
any better than a typical smartphone user
understands what’s going on inside the device.
#
There are two problems.
One is the “measurement problem” of quantum theory.
The other problem is ''wave functions''
#
If nobody understands quantum mechanics,
nobody understands the universe.
. . . . .
Few modern physics departments have researchers
working to understand the foundations of quantum theory.
. . .
Physicists brought up in the modern system will
look into your eyes and explain with all sincerity that
they’re not really interested in understanding how
nature really works; they just want to successfully
predict the outcomes of experiments
. . .
In the 1950s the physicist David Bohm, egged on
by Einstein, proposed an ingenious way of augmenting
traditional quantum theory in order to solve the
measurement problem.
Werner Heisenberg, one of the pioneers of quantum
mechanics, responded by labeling the theory
“a superfluous ideological superstructure,” and
Bohm’s former mentor Robert Oppenheimer huffed,
“If we cannot disprove Bohm, then we must agree to ignore him.”
. . . .
A more recent solution to the measurement problem, proposed
by the physicists Giancarlo Ghirardi, Alberto Rimini and
Tulio Weber, is unknown to most physicists.
. . . .
But they have been neglected by most scientists.
For years, the leading journal in physics had an explicit
policy that papers on the foundations of quantum mechanics
were to be rejected out of hand.
. . . .
The situation might be changing, albeit gradually.
. . .
It’s hard to make progress when the data just keep
confirming the theories we have, rather than pointing
toward new ones.
. . . . https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/07/opinion/sunday/quantum-physics.html
====
https://arxiv.org/abs/1005.4623 http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008EJPh...29...11R http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009EJPh...30L...3P https://arxiv.org/pdf/1705.07106.pdf
https://philpapers.org/rec/DIETRO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrell_rotation https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0106049.pdf https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-2107-5_4
Quantum physics is only under continuum physics -
otherwise it would be atomic physics.
The quantum or individuum of the continuum is
a usual regular part - i.e. more-than-less indistinguishable
except their order in the continuum (and maintaining the
property of being a regular part). The atom is instead the
indivisible, is an individuum, but not a quantum.
Digital physics has quantum mechanics have quantum
interactions in digital physics - but digital physics is a
digital mathematics, and only discrete not continuous.
Quantum physics though is beyond digital physics,
and including it.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e75f/73d86edf4dabeefe9421510a7af908973dd0.pdf
"Nanoscale mechanics: a quantum-continuum approach"
On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 2:09:28 PM UTC-7, ross.f...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, September 7, 2019 at 10:27:56 AM UTC-7, 44so...@gmail.com wrote:
Even Physicists Don’t Understand Quantum Mechanics
Worse, they don’t seem to want to understand it.
By Sean Carroll
Dr. Carroll is a physicist.
Sept. 7, 2019
====
Physicists don't understand their own theory
any better than a typical smartphone user
understands what’s going on inside the device.
#
There are two problems.
One is the “measurement problem” of quantum theory.
The other problem is ''wave functions''
#
If nobody understands quantum mechanics,
nobody understands the universe.
. . . . .
Few modern physics departments have researchers
working to understand the foundations of quantum theory.
. . .
Physicists brought up in the modern system will
look into your eyes and explain with all sincerity that
they’re not really interested in understanding how
nature really works; they just want to successfully
predict the outcomes of experiments
. . .
In the 1950s the physicist David Bohm, egged on
by Einstein, proposed an ingenious way of augmenting
traditional quantum theory in order to solve the
measurement problem.
Werner Heisenberg, one of the pioneers of quantum
mechanics, responded by labeling the theory
“a superfluous ideological superstructure,” and
Bohm’s former mentor Robert Oppenheimer huffed,
“If we cannot disprove Bohm, then we must agree to ignore him.”
. . . .
A more recent solution to the measurement problem, proposed
by the physicists Giancarlo Ghirardi, Alberto Rimini and
Tulio Weber, is unknown to most physicists.
. . . .
But they have been neglected by most scientists.
For years, the leading journal in physics had an explicit
policy that papers on the foundations of quantum mechanics
were to be rejected out of hand.
. . . .
The situation might be changing, albeit gradually.
. . .
It’s hard to make progress when the data just keep
confirming the theories we have, rather than pointing
toward new ones.
. . . . https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/07/opinion/sunday/quantum-physics.html ====
https://arxiv.org/abs/1005.4623 http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008EJPh...29...11R http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009EJPh...30L...3P https://arxiv.org/pdf/1705.07106.pdf
https://philpapers.org/rec/DIETRO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrell_rotation https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0106049.pdf https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-2107-5_4
Quantum physics is only under continuum physics -
otherwise it would be atomic physics.
The quantum or individuum of the continuum is
a usual regular part - i.e. more-than-less indistinguishable
except their order in the continuum (and maintaining the
property of being a regular part). The atom is instead the
indivisible, is an individuum, but not a quantum.
Digital physics has quantum mechanics have quantum
interactions in digital physics - but digital physics is a
digital mathematics, and only discrete not continuous.
Quantum physics though is beyond digital physics,
and including it.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e75f/73d86edf4dabeefe9421510a7af908973dd0.pdf
"Nanoscale mechanics: a quantum-continuum approach"
https://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/research/research-initiatives/discretuum-continuum
https://louisville.edu/history/files/blum-cqcd
https://carter.princeton.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/316/2015/08/EAC-190.pdf
https://socratic.org/questions/why-do-energy-levels-converge-at-a-continuum-and-what-is-a-continuum
https://impa.br/en_US/sobre/memoria/reunioes-cientificas/school-around-vortices-from-continuum-to-quantum-mechanics/
https://www.ippp.dur.ac.uk/Workshops/08/CLAQG/
Mathematical universe hypothesis has a continuous universe?
Digital physics can be sound and totally practical in semi-classical physics,
semi-classical meaning not more as results from systemic than the modeled concerns because usual applied mathematics as numerical methods that
make digital physics practical have limits and error terms.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00977487 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00977487
Even Physicists Don’t Understand Quantum Mechanics=======================
Worse, they don’t seem to want to understand it.
By Sean Carroll
Dr. Carroll is a physicist.
Sept. 7, 2019
====
Physicists don't understand their own theory
any better than a typical smartphone user
understands what’s going on inside the device.
#
There are two problems.
One is the “measurement problem” of quantum theory.
The other problem is ''wave functions''
#
If nobody understands quantum mechanics,
nobody understands the universe.
. . . . .
Few modern physics departments have researchers
working to understand the foundations of quantum theory.
. . .
Physicists brought up in the modern system will
look into your eyes and explain with all sincerity that
they’re not really interested in understanding how
nature really works; they just want to successfully
predict the outcomes of experiments
. . .
In the 1950s the physicist David Bohm, egged on
by Einstein, proposed an ingenious way of augmenting
traditional quantum theory in order to solve the
measurement problem.
Werner Heisenberg, one of the pioneers of quantum
mechanics, responded by labeling the theory
“a superfluous ideological superstructure,” and
Bohm’s former mentor Robert Oppenheimer huffed,
“If we cannot disprove Bohm, then we must agree to ignore him.”
. . . .
A more recent solution to the measurement problem, proposed
by the physicists Giancarlo Ghirardi, Alberto Rimini and
Tulio Weber, is unknown to most physicists.
. . . .
But they have been neglected by most scientists.
For years, the leading journal in physics had an explicit
policy that papers on the foundations of quantum mechanics
were to be rejected out of hand.
. . . .
The situation might be changing, albeit gradually.
. . .
It’s hard to make progress when the data just keep
confirming the theories we have, rather than pointing
toward new ones.
. . . . https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/07/opinion/sunday/quantum-physics.html
====
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 43:04:27 |
| Calls: | 6,648 |
| Files: | 12,193 |
| Messages: | 5,329,632 |