Canonical description of quantization effects observed at measurements on superconducting structures seems one of the most triumphant achievements of quantum mechanics. But impartial consideration uncovers incompleteness and inconsistency of this description. Contradictions in the description of other quantum phenomena are revealed also.
Abstract Quantum mechanics is the foundation of modern physics that is thought to be applicable to all physical phenomena, at least in principle. However, when applied to macroscopic bodies, the theory seems to be inconsistent. Wigner's friend and related thought experiments demonstrate that accounts by different observers described by the rules of quantum mechanics may be contradictory. Although still highly debated, such experiments seem to demonstrate an incompatibility of quantum mechanics with the usual rules of logic. Alternatively, one of the hidden assumptions in the thought experiments must be wrong. For instance, the argument is invalidated if macroscopic observers cannot be considered as physical systems described by the rules of quantum theory. Here we prove that there is a way to apply the rules of quantum mechanics to macroscopic observers while avoiding contradictory accounts of measurement by the observers. The key to this is the random noise that is ever present in nature and that represents the uncontrollable part of interaction between measured system and the surroundings in classical and quantum physics. By exploring the effect of the noise on microscopic and macroscopic bodies, we demonstrate that accounts of Wigner, the friend and other agents all become consistent. Our result suggests that the existing attempts to modify the Schrodinger equation to account for measurement results may be misguided. More broadly, the proposed mechanism for modeling measurements underlies the phenomenon of decoherence and is shown to be sufficient to explain the transition to Newtonian physics in quantum theory.
Quantum mechanics describes successfully numerous quantum phenomena both microscopic and macroscopic, such as superconductivity. But the controversies about quantum mechanics, in the old days and present day, reveal fundamental obscurity in quantum mechanics. In this work reader attention is drawn first of all to the fact that the orthodox description of superconductivity and some other quantum phenomena uses the realistic interpretation of the wave function proposed by Schrodinger whereas the controversies take place until the present about the positivistic interpretation proposed by Born. Causes and essence of the fundamental obscurity of the Born interpretation are considered in detail in the first part of the paper. The fundamental obscurities of the orthodox description of superconductivity and other quantum phenomena are considered in the end of the paper.
Special relativity demands a locality principle (no instantaneous action at a distance); locality implies Bell’s theorem; quantum mechanics violates Bell’s inequality, therefore, quantum mechanics contradicts relativity! Or so it would seem. It is shown, however, that the locality principle needed for Bell’s theorem is stronger than the simple locality that is needed to satisfy the demands of relativity and that quantum mechanics satisfies the latter. The stronger locality principle is equivalent to the conjunction of simple locality and predictive completeness, and it is the latter principle that fails. The notion of predictive completeness is weaker than, and is implied by, the completeness criterion of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen. But the quantum mechanical state description is not only incomplete but incompletable, for any local complete state description would satisfy Bell’s inequality and disagree with experiment.
Quantum technologies went through an explosive development since the beginning of the century. The progress in the field of superconducting quantum structures was especially fast. As the result, the design and characterization of large quantum coherent structures became an engineering problem. We will discuss the current status of the emerging discipline of quantum engineering and possible ways of meeting its main challenge, the fundamental impossibility of an efficient modelling of a quantum system using classical means.