In this article the problem of understanding in physics is considered. Until the early twentieth century world view is represented by purely mechanistic and an explanation of any phenomenon was solved to a visual image. But with the advent of quantum mechanics visual representations largely disappeared. Thus the problem of understanding become aggravated sharply. In this paper, we have separated the basic physical concepts of primary and secondary. Two aspects of the definition of primary concepts as the operational and the intuitive ones are considered. Particular attention is given to the physics of the microworld. It has been considered a combination of deterministic and probabilistic pattern at this level. The concept of probabilistic determinism was introduced. In this article there is an analysis of not material, not physical, but the pure mathematical nature for de Broglie wave and probability waves. Perhaps, this is a fundamentally new type object, on that so far little attention was paid. Interpretation of all these aspects is based on the fundamental experiment for diffraction of alternately flying electrons carried out by V.A. Fabrikant in 1949 year
In this article the problem of understanding in physics is considered. Until the early twentieth century world view is represented by purely mechanistic and an explanation of any phenomenon was solved to a visual image. But with the advent of quantum mechanics visual representations largely disappeared. Thus the problem of understanding become aggravated sharply. In this paper, we have separated the basic physical concepts of primary and secondary. Two aspects of the definition of primary concepts as the operational and the intuitive ones are considered. Particular attention is given to the physics of the microworld. It has been considered a combination of deterministic and probabilistic pattern at this level. The concept of probabilistic determinism was introduced. In this article there is an analysis of not material, not physical, but the pure mathematical nature for de Broglie wave and probability waves. Perhaps, this is a fundamentally new type object, on that so far little attention was paid. Interpretation of all these aspects is based on the fundamental experiment for diffraction of alternately flying electrons carried out by V.A. Fabrikant in 1949 year
The article discusses approaches to understanding the nature of probability in mathematics and physics with the consequences of these approaches, as well as the difficulties that arise. The ontological status of probability is discussed. It is shown that probability theory, contrary to R. Mises, should be classified as a mathematical science, using the definition formulated by A.N. Kolmogorov. The application of this definition in practice is provided within the framework of the classical approach, provided that the connection with physical reality is defined through the concept of equal opportunity. To do this, the concepts of simple and complex events are introduced, and the method of decomposing complex events into simple ones is explained. The point of view is substantiated, according to which a mathematical probability determined and related to physical reality in this way can be considered an objective probability, that is, existing independently of any tests. Various interpretations of quantum mechanics and approaches to understanding probability are also revealed. It is shown that in physics today the existing approaches to understanding the nature of probability contradict each other. In the Bohm interpretation, probability is an analogue of the classical approach – statistical objective probability, which has a mathematical formalization, and in quantum Bayesianism, probability quantifies the degree of reliability and depends on the subject conducting the experiment. The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics tries to eliminate the difficulties associated with combining the wave and corpuscular properties of light and electron beams into a single picture by giving the ontological status of probability, which leads to the problem of understanding physical reality. The article argues for the need for a new connection between the mathematical description of probability and physical reality. The empirical (frequency) approach of R. Mises is analyzed, which causes a lot of criticism, as it does not have a clear consistent formalization. The article argues that this approach is inconsistent with quantum mechanics. The probability given by M. Born in the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics is also considered, which formulates a new definition of probability, which does not exclude the difficulties associated with the physical interpretation of probability. Born’s approach is based on the classical approach and is reduced to a formal axiomatic definition, which assumes the interpretation of probability as a mathematical construct. The connection of probability with physical reality and the consistency of the statistical method of finding probability values remain unresolved problems, which creates a dualism of understanding probability: in mathematics – one thing, in physics – another. If in the mathematical approach, the solution of these problems is carried out through the connection of probability with physical properties, then in quantum mechanics, in the Copenhagen interpretation, problems persist, which is caused by giving the wave function an ontological status.
This paper re-opens the debate on the failure of quantum mechanics to provide an understandable view of micro-reality. A critique is offered of the commonly accepted ‘Copenhagen Interpretation’ of a theory that is only a mathematical approach to the level of reality characterized by atoms and electrons. This critique is based on the oldest approach to thinking about nature for over 2500 years, known as Natural Philosophy. Quantum mechanics (QM) was developed over the first quarter of the 20th Century, when scientists were enthralled by a new philosophy known as Positivism, whose foundations were based on the assumption that material objects exist only when measured by humans – this central assumption conflates epistemology (knowledge) with ontology (existence). The present critique rejects this human-centered view of reality by assuming material reality has existed long before (and will persist long after) human beings (“Realism”). The defensive view that the micro-world is too different to understand using regular thinking (and only a mathematical approach is possible) is rejected totally. At least 12 earlier QM interpretations are critically analyzed, indicating the broad interest in “what does QM mean?” The standard theory of quantum mechanics is thus constructed on only how the micro-world appears to macro measurements - as such, it cannot offer any view of how the foundations of the world are acting when humans are not observing it - this has generated almost 100 years of confusion and contradiction at the very heart of physics. Significantly, we live in a world that is not being measured by scientists but is interacting with itself and with us. QM has failed to provide explanations: only recipes (meaningless equations), not insights. Physics has returned to the pre-Newtonian world of Ptolemaic phenomenology: only verifiable numbers without real understanding. The focus needs to be on an explicit linkage between the micro-world, when left to itself, and our mental models of this sphere of material reality, via the mechanism of measurement. This limits the role of measurement to confirming our mental models of reality but never confusing these with a direct image of ‘the thing in itself’. This implies a deep divide between reality and appearances, as Kant suggested. This paper includes an original analysis of several major assumptions that have been implicit in Classical Mechanics (CM) that were acceptable in the macroscopic domain of reality, demonstrated by its proven successes. Unfortunately, only a few of these assumptions were challenged by the developers of QM. We now show that these other assumptions are still generating confusions in the interpretation of QM and blocking further progress in the understanding of the microscopic domain. Several of these flawed assumptions were introduced by Newton to support the use of continuum mathematics as a model of nature. This paper proposes that it is the attempt to preserve continuum mathematics (especially calculus), which drives much of the mystery and confusion behind all attempts at understanding quantum mechanics. The introduction of discrete mathematics is proposed to help analyze the discrete interactions between the quintessential quantum objects: the electrons and their novel properties. A related paper demonstrates that it is possible to create a point-particle theory of electrons that explains all their peculiar (and ‘paradoxical’) behavior using only physical hypotheses and discrete mathematics without introducing the continuum mathematical ideas of fields or waves. Another (related) paper proves that all the known results for the hydrogen atom can also be exactly calculated from this new perspective with the discrete mathematics. * Surrey, B.C. Canada (604) 542-2299 spsi99@telus.net Version 2.015 08-05-2017 Begun 23-06-2008 {pp. 82, 70.2 Kw; 800 KB}
This paper re-opens the debate on the failure of quantum mechanics to provide an understandable view of micro-reality. A critique is offered of the commonly accepted ‘Copenhagen Interpretation’ of a theory that is only a mathematical approach to the level of reality characterized by atoms and electrons. This critique is based on the oldest approach to thinking about nature for over 2500 years, known as Natural Philosophy. Quantum mechanics (QM) was developed over the first quarter of the 20th Century, when scientists were enthralled by a new philosophy known as Positivism, whose foundations were based on the assumption that material objects exist only when measured by humans – This central assumption conflates epistemology (knowledge) with ontology (existence). The present critique rejects this human-centered view of reality by assuming material reality has existed long before (and will persist long after) human beings (“Realism”). The defensive view that the micro-world is too different to understand using regular thinking (and only a mathematical approach is possible) is rejected totally. At least 12 earlier QM interpretations are critically analyzed, indicating the broad interest in “what does QM mean?” The standard theory of quantum mechanics is thus constructed on only how the micro-world appears to macro measurements - as such, it cannot offer any view of how the foundations of the world are acting when humans are not observing it - this has generated almost 100 years of confusion and contradiction at the very heart of physics. Significantly, we live in a world that is not being measured by scientists but is interacting with itself and with us. QM has failed to provide explanations: only recipes (meaningless equations), not insights. Physics has returned to the pre-Newtonian world of Ptolemaic phenomenology: only verifiable numbers without real understanding. The focus needs to be on an explicit linkage between the micro-world, when left to itself, and our mental models of this sphere of material reality, via the mechanism of measurement. This limits the role of measurement to confirming our mental models of reality but never confusing these with a direct image of ‘the thing in itself’. This implies a deep divide between reality and appearances. This paper proposes that it is the attempt to preserve continuum mathematics (especially calculus), which drives much of the mystery and confusion behind all attempts to understand quantum mechanics. The introduction of discrete mathematics is proposed to help analyze the discrete interactions between the quintessential quantum objects: the electrons and their novel properties. Additionally, several hidden major assumptions have been present in Classical Mechanics (represented by continuum mathematics) since its inception by Newton that are blocking progress and understanding of quantum mechanics. A related paper demonstrates that it is possible to create a point-particle theory of electrons that explains all their peculiar (and ‘paradoxical’) behavior without introducing the continuum mathematical ideas of fields or waves. * Surrey, B.C. Canada (604) 542-2299 spsi99@telus.net Version 1.195 10-07-2016 Begun 23-06-2008 {pp. 80, 70.4 Kw; 800 KB}
Recent years have shown a revival of interest in the conceptual problem raised by the incorporation of quantum mechanics into physics. The problem is an old one, but the use of both waves and particles as visualizations of electrons has presented it in a new and acute form. Several observations based on the methods of quantum mechanics can be made. (1) The time development of an isolated system is completely determinate, as in classical mechanics. (2) A precisely defined quantum mechanical state is an eigenstate of some operator described in classical terms. The production of such a state requires a suitable large scale apparatus. (3) If the state is not precisely defined as an eigenstate, quantum statistical mechanics must be used. (4) The idea of measurement is of doubtful applicability in the analysis of idealized experiments, since the process of measurement destroys the identity of the object (an electron) whose properties are measured. Quantum mechanics may be viewed strictly as a method of describing, in classical terms, the behavior of large scale apparatus, although the use of visualizations with a properly conditioned intuition is probably essential to progress in the analysis of new phenomena.
This article explores methodological aspects of teaching quantum mechanics in higher education within the framework of physics and mathematics programs. Particular attention is given to the challenge’s students face in mastering fundamental concepts due to the high level of abstraction inherent in the subject. The hydrogen atom model is considered as a focal example – being both conceptually significant and visually illustrative in demonstrating the principles of quantum theory. The core emphasis is placed on the interpretation of the wave function and its physical meaning through the concept of probability density. Methods for visualizing electron wave states are discussed, alongside graphical representations of probability densities corresponding to various quantum numbers. The relationship between the analytical solutions of the Schrodinger equation and the physical interpretation of these results is substantiated. Special attention is also devoted to developing students’ understanding of the probabilistic nature of quantum systems, as well as their ability to apply mathematical tools for modeling and interpreting quantum states. Didactic approaches are proposed to enhance students’ abstract thinking and intuitive grasp of quantum principles.
A brief review of basic concepts (interpretations) of quantum mechanics is given. Each of the above interpretations has a number of controversial points, which allow discussion to develop their understanding of the mechanism of the paradoxical quantum phenomena. The article is written for students-economists studying the concepts of modern science and all readers interested in the questions: what is beyond the reality of the quantum-mechanical experiment or does our perception create, in some sense, the physical world. The author believes that the development of quantum information technology is impossible without an answer to these fundamental questions.