In September 1927 at a meeting in Como, Italy, Niels Bohr presented his fairly philosophic Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Bohr made it open that measurement not only disturbs what is being measured, but on a quantum mechanical level DEFINES what is being measured. While that seems just a little step forwards, it is so legitimate that it is very unusual that Einstein rested utterly opposed to the interpretation, positioning it as a spiritual belief rather then a scientific thesis. When you get near or to the little energy quanta potential in this universe it is quite plausible that the process of measurement not only disturbs but more or less destroys the existence of what is being measured. As such it is plausible that all effects linked to the measured entity vanish. What Einstein was so opposed to was the concept of probability postulated by quantum mechanics. A photon had a sure probability possible to be mensurable (am?) in a sure location with a sure energy (momentum). Once you interacted with it, that probability possible, which according to Einstein must correspond valid information in any given location would vanish from the area of influence at once and this changes the state of a big volume of space faster than the speed of light.
This is intelligibly a problem when you desire to glimpse light as a wave packet that travels through space. It is still more unusual when you desire to glimpse light as a point (no existent size) particle hitting around. It seems quite obvious to me (and I hope to you) that both the light wave and the point particle should be seen as numerical abstractions simply that correspond the energy being transferred between two larger entities. In the case of measurement the energy receiving entity is the measurement device! So quite intelligibly the measurement defines what is being measured. As you can but collude with one property of an entity to measure the other it explains Heisenberg’s Uncertainty principle that one is ineffectual to measure all aspects of a quantum at one time. I find that legitimate to the point of being obvious.
That raises the unpleasant question notwithstanding is whether all industrious entities on a particle level are no more than abstractionist numerical devices for energy interchange? At first it was presumed that light was the merely entity that exhibited the wave/particle duality, despite the worrying situation that all atomic components followed Schrödinger’s wave form of quantum mechanics. The astonishing next step was to act the probability wave into the nucleus to answer the question of what could cause the ostensibly self-generated decay of atoms, as found by Madame Curie. The question is intimately connected to Einstein’s explanation of sinister body radiation, that led him to the quantum phenomenon of light. If nucleus particles would be had conjointly by potent forces, there is no reason as to why they would dead permit go and fall aside. There could be extraneous sources of energy that force the nucleus over the edge of being unchanging but such outside influences seemingly have to be quite wild. If we stare notwithstanding at the particles of a nucleus as a probability wave then it would likewise expand way beyond the principle boundaries of the atom. The particles could at some point in time have the probability to be outside the nucleus and therefore the atom falls aside without any other outside influence. It was the 24 year previous Russian Gamow who first wrote a paper in which he used Schrödinger’s equations to explicate alpha radiation in this form. He proposed that it allows the atom to fall aside impromptu. The alpha particle leaves the atom through a nameless device! Today such activity is called quantum tunneling and is loosely noticed and can be used in experiments with photons. The more gumptious the particles the shorter the mayhap tunnels are in mean. There is yet some little probability that still a proton might tunnel to the edge of the cognized universe.
Quantum mechanics cannot explicate and does not attempt to as to why the self-generated action happens. The probability wave is a POTENTIAL but and cannot be the CAUSE of the atom disintegrating or casting an alpha particle. Quantum mechanics does not permit for the causality of definitive physics. Once again that led to Einsteins opposition. Does nonetheless the Copenhagen interpretation not speak about the measurement being the CAUSE of what is being measured, right? The photon or electron does no longer impromptu travel trough hollow space but it is done to look where and when the measuring device is put. Can someone say me why that should be a measuring phenomenon just? The consequences of applying it to measurement just guided to irrational ideas such as Wigner’s participatory universe that simply comes into existence when being detected by a witting entity. The most good cognized fable is that of Schrödinger’s cat that is in a state of being both bushed and live because we do not cognize when the self-generated atomic decay will trigger the cat’s death until we unfastened the box to stare at it. That is quite irrational and documents the problem good. In the other direction we have the multiverse theory that assumes that each possible from quantum probabilities leads to an unexampled universe being made with an unlike future. The cat is live in one and beat in the other universe. That is sodding science fiction and in my book gross nonsense.
Einstein quested that quantum and definitive physics had to recognize complementarity, meaning that causal models had to be applicative in both. So what if that is the key error? It is ever unsafe to question Einstein – the holy god of physics – but here I go. It seem to me that the main issue is with causality and locality, being measured in clocked and distance. Einstein had both deeply entrenched in his E=mc2 demanding his special and cosmopolitan relativity must be adhered to in all formulations and thesis. Some particle had to have a certain location and momentum at a certain time, even if we are unable to ascertain it relatively to other entities. But when two entities exchanged energy by being in the same location at the same time then causality must be observed. That was Einsteins own faith that he never wavered from. I propose that it is this unproven faith that kept the great thinker from discovering more intriguing properties of this universe.
Max J. Pucher is the founder and current Chief Architect of ISIS Papyrus Software, a globally operating companioning that specializes in Artificial Intelligence for business process and communication. He has written several books, frequently speaks and writes on IT and holds several patents.
Article from articlesbase.com