Quantum theory is wrong.

A word in your ear ^ | March 7th 2013 | Mark

[ABrit]

Particles do not retain "information", don't have "knowledge". It is not that the act of observation that alters reality. In fact the physical nature of the "observation" small though it may be is sufficient to alter the metrics of sub atomic particles.

[ZX12R]

It’s the photon wave particle experiment that actually proves observation changes results:

That's exactly correct. In the double slit experiment I described above, attempts to monitor which slit the electron actually travels through, makes the interference pattern disappear. The act of observing changes the results.

What that means precisely, no one knows. That's why there have been several serious interpretations, of which the copenhagen interpretation is only one, and is the consensus among most physicists, but mostly because the others are even kookeir that that. Many worlds theory, hidden variables, etc.

[djf]

I believe Bell proved there is no hidden variable theory that matches quantum predictions.

[ZX12R]

The answers to the unknown always defy logic and our understanding until we have enough information and apply reason. This is the way it always has been.

The brightest minds have been struggling with this for close to a hundred years now, and have hit a brick wall in terms of applying reason. I wouldn't state it with as much certainty as you have, but I mostly tend to agree with you that reason might eventually crack the understanding of the strange goings on. There is also more than just the wave/particle dilema that defies logic and therefore understanding.

[discostu]

My takeaway has always been that the world is a lot weirder than we want.

[ZX12R]

I’m waaaay out of my league on this topic, but a quick question. Is it possible that the answers to the unknown defy logic and our ability to even understand them

Yes, until it is understood, anything is possible. In fact, it is one of interpretations put forward. That the quantum world follows a type of non-human logic that we may learn to understand, or may never be able to understand.

[ZX12R]

I believe Bell proved there is no hidden variable theory that matches quantum predictions.

As I understand it, that's correct, but I'm an old fashion type like Durus, who believes we will prevail eventually. Also, Einstein believed that QM was incomplete and there were hidden variables to explain it. His opinion is pretty difficult to simply disregard.
Bell's theorem also seems to prove that any explanation of quantum behavior has to include non local faster than light communication.

[djf]

Correct.
I have Bell’s “Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics” and surprisingly, actually understand alot of it!

He was a brilliant guy. To find the things he did and not lose his mind in the process must have been quite a challenge!

And, of course, the Aspect experiments proving most of his predictions.

[ZX12R]

You would have to be brilliant and very well educated to actually work with these kinds of things. I however am just an average Joe that finds all these mysteries really fascinating, and have read a lot about it over the years, but I actually understand very little. I keep saying to myself, “how can it be that way?”

[Cboldt]

-- Regardless my point is that there are those that suggest that because observation changes the observed that there are things that are ultimately unknowable. --

Quantum mechanics just says that what is knowable, is probabilities; and that certainty (or near certainty) in one atomic/quantum (small) observation makes for much uncertainty in another.

Many of the issues that people have with quantum mechanics have their roots in the thought experiment explanations. Action on a small scale defies being described in terms that reflect our ability to intuit. "Wave / Particle duality" being one such thought experiment, Schroedinger's cat being another.

[Durus]

It wouldn’t matter to the ball if I was there to intercept photons that already contacted the ball.

[discostu]

We don’t know that. Because there’s no way to see what the ball would do when it is not observed. Meanwhile the photon experiment stands, observing does change the behavior of what is being observed.

[Durus]

You are inferring that there is some unknown force acting on the ball as the result of a human observer?

[discostu]

Not inferring, we KNOW from the photon experiment that observation changes things. The only question is how much other stuff gets changed and how it changes. It might not change anything dramatic about the flight of the ball, or it might, we don’t know that part, but something is changed. Quantum theory tells us the world is a lot more interconnected than anybody really thinks, reality doesn’t happen in a vacuum, observation changes the event.

[SunkenCiv]

Quantum is the team’s 11th vehicle. The team finished Quantum earlier than previous cars, allowing for more testing time and time to design second iteration parts.
Probably will need a Quantum mechanic at some point.

String Theory Ping List

[SunkenCiv]

I’m both stealing and not stealing that, not even I know for certain.

[SunkenCiv]

Chinese Physicists Measure Speed of “Spooky Action At a Distance”
Physics arXiv Blog | March 7, 2013 | Physics arXiv Blog
Posted on 03/07/2013 11:41:49 PM PST by Bobalu
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2994701/posts

[MHGinTN]

You need look no further than ‘pi’. With that ratio included in any equation an arbitrary limits point must be chosen. BUT, it is a fact that the greater the gravitational field, the greater the error ifan arbitrary value for pi is chosen with less than 100 or more decimal points.

[MHGinTN]

Any means to measure any aspectr of an ‘object’ causes an interaction with the thing to be observed, even if one observes only the effect upon the medium used to make the measurement. The inclusion of intellect, arranging some means to measure a thing, adds one more variable to what is already an object being interacted with by the universe. Another way of saying it is, the behavior of the universe will continue whether humans observe it or not.

[ABrit]

American Journal of Physics — May 1973 — Volume 41, Issue 5, pp. 639
An Experiment on Electron Interference
O. Donati, G. P. Missiroli, and G. Pozzi
Istituto di Fisica, Laboratorio di Microscopia Elettronica, Università di Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy
Alerts Tools Share
Abstract
Citing Articles (1)
Full Text: Download PDF | Rent Article ($3.99) | Buy PDF (US$30) | View Cart
An electron interference experiment that provides impressive evidence of the wave-like behavior of electrons has been performed. The interferometric device has been designed as simply as possible and is described in detail. A standard electron microscope is used as an electron-optical bench.
© 1973 American Association of Physics Teachers

This experiment is not “proof”. The paper is behind a paywall and is inaccessible to the public without a fee. It appears to use electrons to detect electrons. Obviously the detecting electrons impact the detected electrons. The experimental method of detection causes the interference, not the fact of observation per se.

[BroJoeK]

pgkdan: ""Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." ~Thomas Jefferson"

A lot of fake Jefferson quotes out there.