11–20 of 306 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a PhD in theoretical quantum optics and I can assure you that it absolutely was (and still is) a mainstream explanation EDIT: I misread the article, I thought it was about whether collapse occurs in general, not about physical explanations for collapse
Please explain the mistake in the article. > The experiments find no evidence of the effects predicted by at least the simplest varieties of these collapse models.
Looking out for quantum consciousness in articles about quantum physics would be a good drinking game, though here it is handled with a proper amount of scepticism. The pressure is enormous for writers to include mumbo-jumbo, because people click on these articles expecting to find out that it's possible to alter the Universe with psyhic abilities, which is how quantum physics is represented in social media, especial…
Having been passionate about this for awhile, I have a layman’s surface overview of the state of physics, or I like to believe so. It amused me to no end when my elderly aunt came to ask me for a tl;dr; on Quantum Physics. She stopped me shortly asking how she can control the universe with her mind. I tried to explain a bit about the famous interpretation (Copenhagen, not Von Neumann–Wigner) but she would have none o…
"Many worlds" or "the wave function never collapses, you are in a superposition" both make much more sense with how we currently view the world
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having been passionate about this for awhile, I have a layman’s surface overview of the state of physics, or I like to believe so. It amused me to no end when my elderly aunt came to ask me for a tl;dr; on Quantum Physics. She stopped me shortly asking how she can control the universe with her mind. I tried to explain a bit about the famous interpretation (Copenhagen, not Von Neumann–Wigner) but she would have none o…
To be fair, the Copenhagen interpretation doesn't really fit today's world view. We have largely moved away from viewing humans or "consciousness" as something special, so the notion that an observer collapses the wave function just seems weird now. "Many worlds" or "the wave function never collapses, you are in a superposition" both make much more sense with how we currently view the world
I think scientifically we will look back on “humans are uniquely conscious” as a categorical differentiation instead of a gradient with other mammals to be as absurd as believing the earth is the center of the universe. “Unique consciousness” is a quasi-religious mechanism we use at a societal level to not run around all the time terrified of death.
There is an often-repeated statement that different quantum mechanical theories are equivalent. This is an over-simplification. Is wave function collapse is a real thing or just an approximation of what happens when a large system is entangled? Some smart people have tried to make theories where wave function collapse is a real thing. These new experiments are working to rule out those ideas. My feeling is that Evere…
By making quantum computer, we are making us into Schrödinger’s Cat. Which entangles our destiny to a quantum possibility.
Such as a highly sophiscated military quantum computer which decides war and peace on quantum computing.
It must be very fun to observe us from a Alien Species's angle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having been passionate about this for awhile, I have a layman’s surface overview of the state of physics, or I like to believe so. It amused me to no end when my elderly aunt came to ask me for a tl;dr; on Quantum Physics. She stopped me shortly asking how she can control the universe with her mind. I tried to explain a bit about the famous interpretation (Copenhagen, not Von Neumann–Wigner) but she would have none o…
To be fair, the Copenhagen interpretation doesn't really fit today's world view. We have largely moved away from viewing humans or "consciousness" as something special, so the notion that an observer collapses the wave function just seems weird now. "Many worlds" or "the wave function never collapses, you are in a superposition" both make much more sense with how we currently view the world
Note that this was not the "mainstream" explanation. It was not even the most popular explanation. Everyone agree about the math, but there are a few interpretations of quantum mechanics. All are weird and equivalente, so it's not possible to make an experiment to decide which one is the correct one. There are a few attempt like this to extend QM and get a less weird theory, but it looks like this failed, at least wi…
I have a PhD in theoretical quantum optics and I can assure you that it absolutely was (and still is) a mainstream explanation EDIT: I misread the article, I thought it was about whether collapse occurs in general, not about physical explanations for collapse
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a PhD in theoretical quantum optics and I can assure you that it absolutely was (and still is) a mainstream explanation EDIT: I misread the article, I thought it was about whether collapse occurs in general, not about physical explanations for collapse
Please explain the mistake in the article. > The experiments find no evidence of the effects predicted by at least the simplest varieties of these collapse models.
In true collapse-of-the-gaps style, what if collapse happens when an entangled system becomes so large that the edges of it are outside of each others event horizons due to cosmic inflation?
I remember something about super determinism being a possible answer to this. Do these results increase the likelihood of that?