Are the Mysteries of Quantum Mechanics Beginning to Dissolve? • Hacker News Board

Re: Are the Mysteries of Quantum Mechanics Beginning to Dissolve?

#11

Post by Noaidi » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 11:14 PM UTC

"Thus the wave function can’t tell us what the quantum system is like before we measure it. "

Nothing is a particle, all measured things are a probability that we make a certainty when we measure them.

When you stop looking at things as things, but instead, see them as probabilities, it will all make sense. My hand and the beer bottle I pick up are both probabilities. Since the mind cannot navigate the world based on probabilities it turns them into certainties.

Physical science is is the only way we can perceive quantum science. There is no "collapse" outside of our brains perception.

Re: Are the Mysteries of Quantum Mechanics Beginning to Dissolve?

#12

Post by andirk » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 11:14 PM UTC

general_reveal wrote: post #7

Quite frankly, Quantum is probably known or solved by a nation state (probably the United States). Similar to AI, they will release it in a safe roll out (as they deem it).

Maybe, but the AI we see in the mainstream today -- generative image/video/text creations and Large Language Model chatbots -- were done via non-governmental public and private companies. And a lot of the work hitting the scene loudly and somewhat prematurely. My understanding is the amount of and type of compute needed for Quantum is pretty intense, so there'd be a huge footprint from its manufacturing to keep it hidden.

Re: Are the Mysteries of Quantum Mechanics Beginning to Dissolve?

#13

Post by Sharlin » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 11:20 PM UTC

spot5010 wrote: post #9

Nevermark wrote: post #3

> None of the leading interpretations of quantum theory are very convincing. They ask us to believe, for example, that the world we experience is fundamentally divided from the subatomic realm it’s built from. Or that there is a wild proliferation of parallel universes, or that a mysterious process causes quantumness to spontaneously collapse. Actually, the "many worlds" "interpretation", simply treats the highly suc…

The part that I have trouble wrapping around with many worlds interpretation is how I as an observer end up in one of the many bifurcations. Any links you can share that will help me with understanding that is welcome! The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy ( https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-manyworlds/ ) goes into this in some depth, and it seems like the right way to think about it is say that "I" in one bran…

Everybody is utterly confused by the hard problem of consciousness. That's just how it is.

Re: Are the Mysteries of Quantum Mechanics Beginning to Dissolve?

#14

Post by uh_uh » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 11:24 PM UTC

Sharlin wrote: post #13

spot5010 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The part that I have trouble wrapping around with many worlds interpretation is how I as an observer end up in one of the many bifurcations. Any links you can share that will help me with understanding that is welcome! The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy ( https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-manyworlds/ ) goes into this in some depth, and it seems like the right way to think about it is say that "I" in one bran…

Everybody is utterly confused by the hard problem of consciousness. That's just how it is.

I'd say we are confused about both the lowest (quantum) and highest level (consciousness) phenomena of the known Universe. Quite humbling.

Re: Are the Mysteries of Quantum Mechanics Beginning to Dissolve?

#15

Post by uh_uh » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 11:28 PM UTC

Nevermark wrote: post #3

> None of the leading interpretations of quantum theory are very convincing. They ask us to believe, for example, that the world we experience is fundamentally divided from the subatomic realm it’s built from. Or that there is a wild proliferation of parallel universes, or that a mysterious process causes quantumness to spontaneously collapse. Actually, the "many worlds" "interpretation", simply treats the highly suc…

Isn't there a magical moment needed still when a single qubit "touches" the rest of the universe?

Re: Are the Mysteries of Quantum Mechanics Beginning to Dissolve?

#16

Post by A_D_E_P_T » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 11:31 PM UTC

Sharlin wrote: post #13

spot5010 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The part that I have trouble wrapping around with many worlds interpretation is how I as an observer end up in one of the many bifurcations. Any links you can share that will help me with understanding that is welcome! The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy ( https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-manyworlds/ ) goes into this in some depth, and it seems like the right way to think about it is say that "I" in one bran…

Everybody is utterly confused by the hard problem of consciousness. That's just how it is.

"Hard problem" makes it out to be much more difficult than it actually is. To simplify things a little bit, if you combine a spatiotemporal sense (a sense of bounded being in space and time) with a general predictive ability (the ability to freely extrapolate in time and space from one's surroundings,) "consciousness" arises necessarily. It's what having such senses feels like from the inside; the first-person view. It's a matter of degree, of course.

The writing of Chalmers and its consequences have been a catastrophe for philosophy.

Re: Are the Mysteries of Quantum Mechanics Beginning to Dissolve?

#17

Post by A_D_E_P_T » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 11:32 PM UTC

lukol wrote: post #6

opens coat Hey kid, wanna try some superdeterminism?

The Block Universe Theory, which relativity all but demands, makes that a pretty potent drug!

Re: Are the Mysteries of Quantum Mechanics Beginning to Dissolve?

#18

Post by uh_uh » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 11:34 PM UTC

A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #16

Sharlin wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everybody is utterly confused by the hard problem of consciousness. That's just how it is.

"Hard problem" makes it out to be much more difficult than it actually is. To simplify things a little bit, if you combine a spatiotemporal sense (a sense of bounded being in space and time) with a general predictive ability (the ability to freely extrapolate in time and space from one's surroundings,) "consciousness" arises necessarily. It's what having such senses feels like from the inside; the first-person view.…

> It's what having such senses feels like from the inside; the first-person view.

The hard problem is that there is such a feeling at all.

Re: Are the Mysteries of Quantum Mechanics Beginning to Dissolve?

#19

Post by wongarsu » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 11:38 PM UTC

borissk wrote: post #8

Are the Mysteries of Quantum Mechanics Beginning to Dissolve? I don’t think so. Zurek’s Decoherence and Quantum Darwinism is thought-provoking, but it’s still speculation without broad buy-in from researchers. We might need ASI to crack these mysteries — our brains weren’t built for this kind of problem.

What we need are tractable experiments to test these theories.

Maybe ASI can help design these. Until it can, it will just be another voice arguing for one position over another on pretty weak arguments. Right now my money would be more on human researchers finding those experiments, but even among those few are even trying

Re: Are the Mysteries of Quantum Mechanics Beginning to Dissolve?

#20

Post by A_D_E_P_T » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 11:41 PM UTC

uh_uh wrote: post #18

A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Hard problem" makes it out to be much more difficult than it actually is. To simplify things a little bit, if you combine a spatiotemporal sense (a sense of bounded being in space and time) with a general predictive ability (the ability to freely extrapolate in time and space from one's surroundings,) "consciousness" arises necessarily. It's what having such senses feels like from the inside; the first-person view.…

> It's what having such senses feels like from the inside; the first-person view. The hard problem is that there is such a feeling at all.

It's not hard at all when you acknowledge that such senses exist in the world, and that you (like others) possess them. As an aside it tends to foster a certain tendency towards empathy.

In essence, you're asking why there's an inside to being a self-modeling system. But "inside" isn't something extraneous, something additional -- rather, it's what "self-modeling" means.

Really the "hard problem" has a very easy answer, but it's a physical/functional answer, and dualists and obscurantists simply don't like it.