If the wave function collapse absolutely in the interaction, how can the weird nature of particles are born in the interaction? �A discussion on quantum entanglement experiments
Objectives: Particles can re-exhibit volatility after their wave function (or wave packet) collapses (proven by experiments such as secondary electron diffraction experiments). Is the volatility recovered or does the collapse process not destroy the volatility or is the collapse process not there at all? After the wave function (or wave packet) of a particle collapses, the superposition state should not exist. Methods: If the wave function can be collapsed by measurement and the quantum characteristics cannot be recovered after the collapse, then the microscopic particles that reach the free motion state through interaction can no longer have the quantum characteristics of quantum parallelism, Quantum Entanglement (QEM) or quantum state superposition. Findings: Restricted by the conditions in this conditional adverbial clause, logically, it is impossible to find Quantum Entanglement State (QEMS) by experiment (recognizing that the quantum superposition state is a non-real state, it is recognized that the state is unobservable). Under the assumption that entangled states (or superposition states) exist and that measurement can destroy entangled states, the related experimental phenomena are interpreted as QEMS. Application: This is clearly a logical cycle. Experiments show that the non-projective measurement cannot eliminate the diffraction effect of electron rays. Keywords: Logical Cycle, Quantum Entanglement, Quantum Mechanics, Quantum Non-Locality, Wave Function Collapse
Objectives: Particles can re-exhibit volatility after their wave function (or wave packet) collapses (proven by experiments such as secondary electron diffraction experiments). Is the volatility recovered or does the collapse process not destroy the volatility or is the collapse process not there at all? After the wave function (or wave packet) of a particle collapses, the superposition state should not exist. Methods: If the wave function can be collapsed by measurement and the quantum characteristics cannot be recovered after the collapse, then the microscopic particles that reach the free motion state through interaction can no longer have the quantum characteristics of quantum parallelism, Quantum Entanglement (QEM) or quantum state superposition. Findings: Restricted by the conditions in this conditional adverbial clause, logically, it is impossible to find Quantum Entanglement State (QEMS) by experiment (recognizing that the quantum superposition state is a non-real state, it is recognized that the state is unobservable). Under the assumption that entangled states (or superposition states) exist and that measurement can destroy entangled states, the related experimental phenomena are interpreted as QEMS. Application: This is clearly a logical cycle. Experiments show that the non-projective measurement cannot eliminate the diffraction effect of electron rays. Keywords: Logical Cycle, Quantum Entanglement, Quantum Mechanics, Quantum Non-Locality, Wave Function Collapse
The problem of measurement in quantum mechanics is that the quantum particle in the course of evolution, as described by the linear Schrodinger equation, exists in all of its possible states, but in measuring, the particle is always detected in only one of its states. This property is called the "collapse of the wave function" and was formulated by Von Neumann as one of the postulates of quantum mechanics. However, it remains unclear at what point in time and under what laws this transition occurs. This article demonstrates that the collapse of the wave function may be due to the creation or annihilation of particles (quasi-particles). The processes of the creation or annihilation of particles play a key role in the measurements and are described on the basis of quantum field theory. The system of equations of quantum field theory of particles and fields is non-linear; as a result, the principle of superposition does not hold for the theory. The collapse of the wave function is a consequence of this non-linearity and occurs at the moment of creation (annihilation) of a particle. This result demonstrates that the wave function collapse can occur in both microscopic and macroscopic systems. Understanding the mechanisms of the collapse of the wave function can lead to the creation of microscopic devices involved in the calculations based on quantum computing.
A quantum entangled state is a quantum superposition state. The principle of quantum superposition, and therefore the existence of quantum entanglement, is contingent upon the validity of quantum theory. Thus, the generation of quantum entanglement requires that interactions occur between small-mass particles localized in a confined spatial region, resulting in each particle’s quantum state being a bound state. In other words, the prerequisite for the validity of quantum theory must be satisfied. At the same time, conserved quantities must exist between quantum superposition states, as only quantum states with conserved quantities can undergo superposition, allowing the particle system to generate quantum entangled states. Quantum entangled states can occur between electrons within an atom, between atoms, between molecules, or between atoms and molecules. Within the atomic nucleus, quantum entanglement can exist among protons, neutrons, and the quarks. In superconductivity, superfluidity, and Bose-Einstein condensation, they manifest as macroscopic quantum entanglement, which respectively come from the statistical results of a large amount of microscopic quantum entanglement between electrons, atoms or molecules. For massive macroscopic objects, they exhibit classical properties that cannot be described by quantum theory, and the principle of quantum superposition does not hold. Therefore, no entangled state is generated. It should be particularly emphasized that even for microscopic particle systems, if they exist in a large spatial region, they cannot be described by quantum theory. In such cases, the quantum superposition principle does not hold, and quantum entanglement phenomena do not exist. Therefore, within a large spatial region, multi-electron, multi-photon, and other microscopic systems do not have quantum entangled states; under certain conditions, quantum correlated states can be generated. Consequently, in a large spatial region, the mainstream viewpoints about non-locality—such as the so-called instantaneous collapse of entangled particles during measurement, infinite propagation speed, and the “spooky action at a distance”—are all incorrect. In experiments related to quantum communication and the verification of Bell’s inequality, the quantum states used are quantum correlated states rather than quantum entangled states. Regardless of whether the systems are microscopic or macroscopic, phenomena occurring in a large spatial region must adhere to the principles of causality, realism, and locality. In other words, Einstein’s viewpoint is correct.
Abstract The so-called quantum measurement problems are solved from a new perspective. One of the main observations is that the basic entities of our world are particles, elementary or composite. It follows that each elementary process, hence each measurement process at its core, is a spacetime, pointlike, event. Another key idea is that, when a microsystem ψ gets into contact with the experimental device, factorization of ψ rapidly fails and entangled mixed states appear. The wave functions for the microsystem-apparatus coupled system for different measurement outcomes then lack overlapping spacetime support. It means that the aftermath of each measurement is a single term in the sum: a “wave-function collapse”. Our discussion leading to a diagonal density matrix, ρ = diag(|c 1|2,…,|cn |2,…) shows how the information encoded in the wave function <?CDATA $|\psi \rangle =\displaystyle {\sum }_{n}{c}_{n}|n\rangle $?> | ψ 〉 = ∑ n c n | n 〉 gets transcribed, via entanglement with the experimental device and environment, into the relative frequencies Pn = |cn |2 for various experimental outcomes F = fn . Our discussion represents the first, significant steps towards filling in the logical gaps in the conventional interpretation based on Born’s rule, replacing it with a clearer understanding of quantum mechanics. Accepting objective reality of quantum fluctuations, independent of any experiments, and independently of human presence, one renounces the idea that in a fundamental, complete theory of Nature the result of each single experiment must necessarily be predictable.
In the present letter, we cast special focus on the peculiarity of wave function collapse. Possibly its most salient manifestation lies in ``nonlocal entanglement'' when multiple correlated quantum objects are described in superposition as a non separable whole state. Coming from mainstream Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, it is claimed to have been experimentally verified in numerous variants through Bell, Clauser, Horne, Shimony and Holt's inequality criteria.Unfortunately, it is wrongly derived because of an original logical confusion doubled with unphysical hypotheses, both astonishingly remained unnoticed so far.As we demonstrate, reviewing at length the necessary material of probability theory and Hilbert, the latent information that solves the conundrum is not directly measurable from a quantum state as it lies in a phase shift between projection basis states.Consequently, it is now clear that the true nature of quantum mechanics is the coarse-grained statistical description of a ``classical vacuum,'' possibly in states of mixed oscillatory excitations, abiding by the laws of classical mechanics, confirming de Broglie's hypothesis.\pagebreak``\textit{The more cheese there is, the more holes there are. But the more holes there are, the less cheese there is. So the more cheese, the less cheese!}''
The quantum measurement problems are revisited from a new perspective. One of the main ideas of this work is that the basic entities of our world are various types of particles, elementary or composite. It follows that each elementary process, hence each measurement process at its core, is a space–time, pointlike, event. Another key idea is that, when a microsystem [Formula: see text] gets into contact with the experimental device, factorization of [Formula: see text] rapidly fails and entangled mixed states appear. The wave functions for the microsystem-apparatus coupled systems for different measurement outcomes then lack overlapping space–time support. It means that the aftermath of each measurement is a single term in the sum: a “wave function collapse.” Our discussion leading to a diagonal density matrix, [Formula: see text] shows how the information encoded in the wave function [Formula: see text] gets transcribed, via entanglement with the experimental device and environment, into the relative frequencies [Formula: see text] for various experimental results [Formula: see text]. These results represent the first, significant steps towards filling in the logical gaps in the standard interpretation based on Born’s rule, and replacing it with a more natural one. Accepting objective reality of quantum fluctuations, independent of any experiments, and independently of human presence, one renounces the idea that in a fundamental, complete theory of Nature the result of each single experiment must necessarily be predictable. A few well-known puzzles such as the Schrödinger cat conundrum and the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen (EPR) paradox are briefly reviewed: they can all be naturally explained away.
We investigate the meaning of the wave function by analyzing the mass and charge density distributions of a quantum system. According to protective measurement, a charged quantum system has effective mass and charge density distributing in space, proportional to the square of the absolute value of its wave function. In a realistic interpretation, the wave function of a quantum system can be taken as a description of either a physical field or the ergodic motion of a particle. The essential difference between a field and the ergodic motion of a particle lies in the property of simultaneity; a field exists throughout space simultaneously, whereas the ergodic motion of a particle exists throughout space in a time‐divided way. If the wave function is a physical field, then the mass and charge density will be distributed in space simultaneously for a charged quantum system, and thus there will exist gravitational and electrostatic self‐interactions of its wave function. This not only violates the superposition principle of quantum mechanics but also contradicts experimental observations. Thus the wave function cannot be a description of a physical field but be a description of the ergodic motion of a particle. For the later there is only a localized particle with mass and charge at every instant, and thus there will not exist any self‐interaction for the wave function. It is further argued that the classical ergodic models, which assume continuous motion of particles, cannot be consistent with quantum mechanics. Based on the negative result, we suggest that the wave function is a description of the quantum motion of particles, which is random and discontinuous in nature. On this interpretation, the square of the absolute value of the wave function not only gives the probability of the particle being found in certain locations, but also gives the probability of the particle being there. The suggested new interpretation of the wave function provides a natural realistic alternative to the orthodox interpretation, and it also implies that the de Broglie‐Bohm theory and many‐worlds interpretation are wrong and the dynamical collapse theories are in the right direction by admitting wavefunction collapse.