Richard Feynman once said, “I think it is safe to say that no one understands Quantum Mechanics”. The well-known article on the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox brought forth further doubts on the interpretation of quantum theory. Einstein’s doubt on quantum theory is a doubleedged sword: experimental verification of quantum theory would contradict the hypothesis that speed of light is finite. It has been almost a century since the creation of quantum theory and special relativity, and the relevant doubts brought forward remain unresolved. We posit that the existence of discontinuity points and quantum wormholes would imply superluminal phenomenon or infinite speed of light, which provides for an important supplement to the invariance principle of the speed of light and superluminal phenomena. This can potentially resolve the inconsistency between special relativity and quantum theory.
Richard Feynman once said, “I think it is safe to say that no one understands Quantum Mechanics”. The well-known article on the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox brought forth further doubts on the interpretation of quantum theory. Einstein’s doubt on quantum theory is a doubleedged sword: experimental verification of quantum theory would contradict the hypothesis that speed of light is finite. It has been almost a century since the creation of quantum theory and special relativity, and the relevant doubts brought forward remain unresolved. We posit that the existence of discontinuity points and quantum wormholes would imply superluminal phenomenon or infinite speed of light, which provides for an important supplement to the invariance principle of the speed of light and superluminal phenomena. This can potentially resolve the inconsistency between special relativity and quantum theory.
Unlike special relativity, quantum mechanics was not the inspired product of one mind. It developed, in fits and starts, over a period of 25 years (1900–1925), and many cooks stirred the broth. Even now, a century later, quantum mechanics raises profound conceptual questions. Every competent physicist can “do” quantum mechanics, and the predictions it makes are in spectacularly good agreement with experimental results; there can be little doubt that quantum mechanics is “right.” On the other hand, as Richard Feynman once remarked, “nobody understands quantum mechanics.” I'll tell the story in two parts. First the history (how the essential pieces of the puzzle were assembled), and then the implications (what the finished picture has to say about our world). Photons Like relativity, quantum mechanics began with the study of light. In both cases, this historical association is misleading. Relativity, really, has nothing to do with light – to be sure, it involves that magic speed limit, c , and of course the most familiar thing that travels at speed c is light. So light is a convenient vehicle for introducing the subject. But it is perfectly possible to imagine a universe in which there is no such thing as light, and yet relativity might still be valid. Quantum mechanics, too, starts with light – in this case the “quantum” of light (the photon). But, as it turns out, this is just one rather specialized example of much more general principles – in fact, a rather bad example, because photons are by their nature relativistic (they travel at the speed of light), and it would be more natural to begin with the quantum mechanics of slow-moving objects, in analogy with Newtonian mechanics.
Albert Einstein found that, for two particles coming from the same source, when the state of one changes, that of the other may change at the same time, no matter how far they are apart from each other.This superluminal phenomenon totally violates the special theory of relativity which says nothing's speed exceeds the limit of light speed, what's more, as of today, nobody has made a satisfying explanation of this strange phenomenon, not even Einstein's own general relativity.We bring forward our novel view of this long pending dilemma based on the observations of the latest physical lab reports and by summarizing various theories of information, computer science, communications, religion and physics itself.We call it Super General Relativity for now.
Mr Administrator,Dear colleagues,Ladies and gentlemen,“I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics”. This statement, made by physicist Richard Feynman, expresses a paradoxical truth about the scientific theory that revolutionised our understanding of Nature and made an extraordinary contribution to our means of acting on and gaining information about the world. In this lecture, I will discuss quantum physics with you by attempting to resolve this paradox. And if I don’...
The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox that argues for the incompleteness of quantum mechanics as a description of physical reality has been put to rest by John Bell’s famous theorem, which inspired numerous experimental tests and brought about further affirmations of quantum reality. Nevertheless, in his writings and public presentations, Richard Feynman never acknowledged the significance of Bell’s contribution to the resolution of the EPR paradox. In this paper, we discuss several variants of the Bell inequalities (including one that was specifically espoused by Feynman), and explore the ways in which they demolish the arguments in favor of local hidden-variable theories. We also examine the roots of Feynman’s attitude toward Bell’s theorem in the context of Feynman’s special perspective on quantum mechanics.
A.Einstein held an opposite attitude towards Quantum Mechanics(QM),which first appeared in 1926 and reached the top in 1935 when he,together with B.Podolsky,N.Rosen published the EPR thesis and it promotes science development in an opposite side.The EPR thesis is based on Special Relativity(SR).Both SR and EPR deny the possibility of faster-than-light.But QM allows the existence of faster-than-light,agreeing to non-locality of QM is the premise of researching in faster-than light.In 1965,during the interview John Bell confided that his unequality was the outcome of EPR thinking,which denied ultra-space effect under EPR thesis,conditions resulted in quite peculiar correlations that QM predicted.The results of Aspect’s experiments were within expectation that QM has never been wrong now and will not in the future despite of strict requirements.Undoubtedly,the experiments proved that Einstein’s ideas didn’t hold water.In Bell’s opinion,to get rid of the difficulties after the announcement of the Aspect’s experiments,it intends to go back to Lorentz and Poincare,and assume that ether existed as a referential system in which matters went faster than light.Bell repeatedly pointed out that be wanted to go back to ether because EPR had predicted there was something faster than light in the background.…… Since 1992,it is reported that there have been many successful faster than light experiments.Some of them are based on quantum tunneling effect;some are based on classic physical phenomena such as evanescent waves,anomalous dispersion.And in 2008,D.Salart et.al.performed a experiment using entangled photons between two villages separated by 18km.In conclusion,the speed of the influence of quantum entanglement would have to exceed than of light by at least four orders of magnitude,i.e.10 4 c ～ 10 7 c.Anyway,this experiment was the summation of discussions about the EPR thesis for a long time.For the past 25 years Quantum Superluminality was one subject of my chief study.In 1985,we proposed the model of quantum potential barrier equivalent circuit.In 1991,we first indicated that there could be the wave velocity v p 0 and v g 0 in the evanescent waves mode of the waveguide below cut off and the book An Introduction to the Theory of waveguide Below Cut-off made me get the First National Scientific and Technology Book Award of China.Moreover,in 2003 we through an experiment in the coaxial photonic crystal,a superluminal group velocity of(1.5 ～ 2.4) c are observed in the stop-band of frequency.In 2005,we suggested the term of General Information Velocity(GIV);and in 2010,we suggested the term of Quantum Superluminality(QS),and also suggested remodel the existing accelerator to discover the superluminal strange electron.Now,this paper discusses some problems of Quantum Superluminality profoundly,such as the velocity definition of the microscopic particles,the relation between the EPR thinking and the faster-than-light research,the interaction speed of the quantum entangle-state,superluminality of the quantum tunneling,the negative wave velocity,QS of the Casimir effect.We show that the unite of Quantum Optics(QO) and classical physical sujects are becoming more important.Since 2000,the negative group velocity experiments are always employing some atomic metal(such as Cs、Ka、Rb) vapor for tests.It make full use of the latest achievement in laser science and technology,then it was modern physical experiment in QO,not the classical physical experiment.The negative group velocity not only the special situation of faster-than-light,but also has the features: the exiting pulse’s peak can appear to exit the medium before the peak of the input pulse enters.So it was different that of classical causality.Although that knowledges and discovers of QS are widen and lively,then it greatly inspired us;but it is not the immediate conclusion that answers some questions about the possibility of material,energy and information according to faster-than-light propagation.To design the ingenious and convincing superluminal experiments are also basic task of scientists.
Abstract Chapter 1 points out that the mystery of entanglement has led Physics Nobel Laureates to claim “nobody understands quantum mechanics.” The Chapter goes on to introduce: the EPR and EPR–Bell paradoxes, various attempts to resolve them, our proposed resolution whereby the relativity principle (no preferred reference frame, NPRF) justifies the Planck postulate (NPRF + h) exactly like the relativity principle justifies the light postulate (NPRF + c), the Planck postulate as a result of Information Invariance & Continuity from quantum information theory, the importance of the relativity principle, subjective versus objective spacetime models of reality, spacelike and timelike relations in spacetime, and four experiments leading to our Poincaré symmetric ontology.