Our Quantized Reality: Life in the Strobe LightsAlthough we perceive that, generally, everyday life and things are continuous -energy, movement, etc., a bit of scientific analysis of numerous phenomena shows that in many cases it just cannot possibly be so.This realization gave rise a few decades ago to the new science of quantum mechanics.Quantum mechanics has proved so far to be hands down the most successful theory in the history of physics in explaining reality, but it's also by far the weirdest, leading many to question whether this can be the ultimate explanation of reality.Historically, quantum mechanics arose to try and explain how atoms and electrons behave.Matter is made up of atoms, i.e. electrons spinning around nuclei.But how can electrically charged electrons go on spinning, at high speed, without steadily losing energy?According to all the laws of classical physics, electrons ought to slowly wind down as their motion should lead to a never-ceasing leakage of energy.Straightforward calculations in classical physics tell us that they would quickly collapse onto the nucleus -which they obviously do not.Neither human intuition nor classical mechanics can describe nor explain how matter behaves at that level, but quantum mechanics does (25).
Our Quantized Reality: Life in the Strobe LightsAlthough we perceive that, generally, everyday life and things are continuous -energy, movement, etc., a bit of scientific analysis of numerous phenomena shows that in many cases it just cannot possibly be so.This realization gave rise a few decades ago to the new science of quantum mechanics.Quantum mechanics has proved so far to be hands down the most successful theory in the history of physics in explaining reality, but it's also by far the weirdest, leading many to question whether this can be the ultimate explanation of reality.Historically, quantum mechanics arose to try and explain how atoms and electrons behave.Matter is made up of atoms, i.e. electrons spinning around nuclei.But how can electrically charged electrons go on spinning, at high speed, without steadily losing energy?According to all the laws of classical physics, electrons ought to slowly wind down as their motion should lead to a never-ceasing leakage of energy.Straightforward calculations in classical physics tell us that they would quickly collapse onto the nucleus -which they obviously do not.Neither human intuition nor classical mechanics can describe nor explain how matter behaves at that level, but quantum mechanics does (25).
Classical mechanics, which gives a fairly accurate description of large systems (e.g., solar system) as also of mechanical systems in our every day life, however, breaks down when applied to small (microscopic) systems such as molecules, atoms and nuclei. For example, (1) classical mechanics cannot even explain why the atoms are stable at all. A classical atom with electrons moving in circular or elliptic orbits around the nucleus would continuously radiate energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation because an accelerated charge does radiate energy. As a result the radius of the orbit would become smaller and smaller, resulting in instability of the atom. On the other hand, the atoms are found to be remarkably stable in practice. (2) Another fact of observation that classical mechanics fails to explain is wave particle duality in radiation as well as in material particles. It is well known that light exhibits the phenomena of interference, diffraction and polarization which can be easily understood on the basis of wave aspect of radiation. But light also exhibits the phenomena of photo-electric effect, Compton effect and Raman effect which can only be understood in terms of corpuscular or quantum aspect of radiation. The dual behavior of light, or radiation cannot be consistently understood on the basis of classical concepts alone or explained away by saying that light behaves as wave or particle depending on the kind of experiment we do with it (complementarity). Moreover, a beam of material particles, like electrons and neutrons, demonstrates wave-like properties (e.g., diffraction). A brief outline of phenomena that require quantum mechanics for their understanding follows.
Introduction It is believed that the basic physical building blocks forming the world we live in may be categorized into particles of matter and carriers of force between matter. All known elementary constituents of matter and transmitters of force are quantized. For example, energy, momentum, and angular momentum take on discrete quantized values. The electron is an example of an elementary particle of matter, and the photon is an example of a transmitter of force. Neutrons, protons, and atoms are composite particles made up of elementary particles of matter and transmitters of force. These composite particles are also quantized. Because classical mechanics is unable to explain quantization, we must learn quantum mechanics in order to understand the microscopic properties of atoms – which, for example, make up solids such as crystalline semiconductors. Historically, the laws of quantum mechanics have been established by experiment. The most important early experiments involved light. Long before it was realized that light waves are quantized into particles called photons, key experiments on the wave properties of light were performed. For example, it was established that the color of visible light is associated with different wavelengths of light. Table 2.1 shows the range of wavelengths corresponding to different colors. The connection between optical and electrical phenomena was established by Maxwell in 1864. This extended the concept of light to include the complete electromagnetic spectrum. A great deal of effort was, and continues to be, spent gathering information on the behavior of light.
Everybody has heard that we live in a world made of atoms. But far more fundamentally, we live in a universe made of quanta. Many things are not made of atoms: light, radio waves, electric current, magnetic fields, Earth's gravitational field, not to mention exotica such a neutron stars, black holes, dark energy, and dark matter. But everything, including atoms, is made of highly unified or "coherent" bundles of energy called "quanta" that (like everything else) obey certain rules. In the case of the quantum, these rules are called "quantum physics." This is a book about quanta and their unexpected, some would say peculiar, behavior--tales, if you will, of the quantum. The quantum has developed the reputation of being capricious, bewildering, even impossible to understand. The peculiar habits of quanta are certainly not what we would have expected to find at the foundation of physical reality, but these habits are not necessarily bewildering and not at all impossible or paradoxical. This book explains those habits--the quantum rules--in everyday language, without mathematics or unnecessary technicalities. While most popular books about quantum physics follow the topic's scientific history from 1900 to today, this book follows the phenomena: wave-particle duality, fundamental randomness, quantum states, superpositions (being in two places at once), entanglement, non-locality, Schrodinger's cat, and quantum jumps, and presents the history and the scientists only to the extent that they illuminate the phenomena.
Quantum mechanics occupies a unique position in the history of science. It has survived all experimental tests to date, culminating with the most precise comparison of any measurement to any theory – a 1987 measurement of the electron's magnetic moment, or gyromagnetic ratio g e = 2.002 319 304 39 (Van Dyck et al. 1987), agreeing with QED theory to 12 digits. Despite this and other dramatic successes of quantum mechanics, its foundations are often questioned, owing to the glaring difficulties in reconciling quantum physics with the classical laws of physics that govern macroscopic bodies. If quantum mechanics is indeed a complete theory of nature, why does it not apply to everyday life? Even Richard Feynman (1982), a fierce defender of quantum mechanics, memorably stated that: We have always had a great deal of difficulty in understanding the world view that quantum mechanics represents … Okay, I still get nervous with it … It has not yet become obvious to me that there is no real problem. I cannot define the real problem, therefore I suspect there's no real problem, but I'm not sure there's no real problem. In the dawn of the twenty-first century, John A. Wheeler's big question “Why the quantum?” has returned to the forefront of physics with full steam. Advances in experimental physics are beginning to realize the same thought-experiments that proved helpful to Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrödinger, and the other founders of quantum mechanics.
For over nine decades, quantum mechanics has profoundly shaped our understanding of nature, offering explanations for the stability of atoms, the formation of mole cules, the properties of materials, and phenomena such as light or radioactivity. It is essential to modern technologies—from microchips to lasers—and underpins the physics of elementary particles. Yet, despite its successes, it remains a deeply mysterious theory, confronting a central enigma: why does the quantum world behave so differently from everyday reality? Elements such as superposition and quantum entanglement—which allow particles to exist simultaneously in multiple states or remain interconnected regardless of distance—contradict classical world intuitions. This gap between microscopic and macroscopic behavior has given rise to what is known as the “measurement problem,” raising fundamental questions about the nature of reality. Diverging interpretations have led to two major schools of thought: anti-realism, promoted by Niels Bohr, which holds that reality depends on the observer and their interaction with measurement instruments; and realism, supported by Albert Einstein, which argues that quantum mechanics is incomplete and that eality exists independently of observation. Bohr’s complementary philosophy and Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle were central to the formulation of the “Copenhagen interpretation,” which became dominant in the 20th century. However, the persistent opposition of scientists like Einstein and Schrödinger inspired generations of physicists to seek a unification between quantum mechanics and relativity, culminating in new theories such as loop quantum gravity and string theory. Thus, the debate between realism and anti-realism remains alive, and philosophy continues to play a crucial role in exploring the new foundations of physics.
The author attempts to answer the questions there are in the title of this paper. These questions are questions that scientists and philosophers have been asking themselves for many decades since Quantum Mechanics was formulated to explain the phenomena of the atomic and subatomic world. First of all a short but complete historical review of the transition between Classical Mechanics and Quantum Mechanics there is. It is preceded by some of the methodological premises that fit a certain vision of science. Then the author examines the issues and debates that have occurred on aspects of quantum mechanics such as realism, non-locality and probabilism (in contrast to determinism of Classic Mechanics). In doing this author llustrates the foundations of the various interpretations of quantum mechanics which, in an attempt to resolve these problems, have been given. The absurdities, and conflicts with the common sense, of quantum mechanics are shown to be largely apparent. In doing this, we examine the analogies of classical physics, as well as those of everyday life. Recent experimental results are taken into consideration. It is concluded that Quantum Mechanics presents elements of rupture more with Classical Physics than with the everyday experience.