One of the main causes of issues about the today’s situation of technology comes from a big mismatch between the new technology based on quantum mechanics (laws in the micro world) and the old perspective (mechanistic viewpoint in the macro world) for more than a half century. I explain this circumstance and show how to settle this problem by solving the so-called measurement problem of quantum mechanics. These give us a new perspective which unify the laws of macro and micro worlds and bring the current technology into order. To go this way would be to enter by the narrow gate.
One of the main causes of issues about the today’s situation of technology comes from a big mismatch between the new technology based on quantum mechanics (laws in the micro world) and the old perspective (mechanistic viewpoint in the macro world) for more than a half century. I explain this circumstance and show how to settle this problem by solving the so-called measurement problem of quantum mechanics. These give us a new perspective which unify the laws of macro and micro worlds and bring the current technology into order. To go this way would be to enter by the narrow gate.
There is a big mismatch between the new technology based on the laws in the micro world, and the old mechanistic viewpoint established in the macro world. This is one of the main causes of the chaotic state of recent technology. I explain historically this circumstance and show how to settle this problem by solving the so-called measurement problem of quantum mechanics. These suggest a new worldview which epistemologically unifies the macro and micro worlds, and brings the new technology into order.
Quantum mechanics is our most successful physical theory. It predicts the behavior of atoms, molecules, and light to ten decimal places. No experiment has ever contradicted it. It also contains a crack at its foundation. The theory’s central equation—the Schrodinger equation—describes a smooth, continuous, perfectly predictable evolution of the quantum state. But whenever anyone performs a measurement, they get a single, definite result. Which result they get appears to be random. The transition from smooth evolution to random outcome is called the “collapse of the wavefunction,” and after nearly a century of analysis, there is no agreed-upon explanation for what causes it, when it occurs, or whether it occurs at all. This is the measurement problem. The measurement problem is not a minor puzzle at the margins of the theory. It is a failure to explain the most basic operation in science: looking at the result of an experiment. Around it cluster other puzzles. Light behaves like a wave in some experiments and like a particle in others—two contradictory descriptions. Two particles that have interacted remain correlated across arbitrary distances, as though communicating faster than light. The probabilities that govern measurement outcomes appear as a postulate—the Born rule—inserted by hand with no deeper justification. And the theory offers no unified picture of reality: quantum mechanics, general relativity, and the standard model of particle physics speak incompatible mathematical languages. A century of effort has produced many interpretations of quantum mechanics. Copenhagen. Many-worlds. De Broglie-Bohm. Objective collapse. Quantum Bayesianism. None has achieved consensus. The measurement problem remains. This document proposes that the source of these puzzles is not quantum mechanics itself. It is a single, invisible assumption made at the very beginning of the theory in 1900—an assumption so deeply embedded that nobody noticed they were making it. Change that assumption, and the puzzles do not get solved. They dissolve. They stop being puzzles. They become predictable consequences of geometry.
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}
At the close of the nineteenth century, we stood on the threshold of one of the greatest periods of science, in which the entire world and understanding of science would be shaken to the core and greatly modified. This explosion of knowledge led ultimately to that same information revolution that we live in today. Planck and Einstein showed that light was not continuous but made of small corpuscles that today we call photons. Einstein changed the understanding of mechanics with his theory of relativity: airplanes became conceivable; radio and television blossomed; and the microelectronics industry, which drives most of modern technology, came into being. New areas of science were greatly expanded and developed, and one of these was quantum mechanics, which is the story to be told here. Yet, the development of quantum mechanics and the leadership of Niels Bohr have distorted the understanding of quantum mechanics in a strange way. There are some who would say that Bohr set back the real understanding of quantum mechanics by half a century. I believe they underestimate his role, and it may be something more like a full century. Whether we call it the Copenhagen interpretation, or the Copenhagen orthodoxy, it is the how for the continuing mysticism provided by Mach that is still remaining in quantum mechanics. It is not the why. Why it perseveres and why it was forced on the field in the first place is an important perception to be studied. In this book, I want to trace the development of quantum mechanics and try to uncover the why.
Although it is 70 years old, there are still areas of quantum theory which are open to interpretation. This book deals with such interpretational problems, and in particular with the issue of the measurement process. The main theme is whether quantum mechanics can be viewed as a (semantically) complete theory, namely as a theory capable of describing not only the physical object under observation but also the measuring instruments used to detect the properties of that physical object. The problematic aspects arise from the fact that the measuring instruments themselves behave as classical physical systems. Thus, we are faced with the open problem of the transition from the quantum to the classical, or more explicitly, the problem of why the composition of many quantum micro-objects gives rise to classical macro-objects. This book goes carefully, exhaustively, and deeply into the interpretational problems of quantum mechanics induced by the measurement process. The solution of many relevant issues, as well as the problems that remain unsolved, emerge clearly. The discussion itself is self-contained and the technical parts are reader-friendly. This book is of value to graduate students and researchers who have an interest in the physical, mathematical, and philosophical foundations of quantum mechanics.
The development of quantum mechanics and quantum physics in general is one of the greatest intellectual achievements of the 20th century. Initially, quantum physicists focused on mathematically describing and understanding the laws of a micro-world, comprised of atoms, molecules and photons. Nuclei and sub-atomic particles were discovered, particle physics evolved, and complex quantum systems in chemistry and solid-state physics are now described in terms of quantum physics. Within a century, quantum physics became the framework, which allows us to describe and predict, albeit with probabilities, the behavior of the microscopic world as we know it. The powerful quantum framework led to revolutionary technical advances for a century, such as semiconductor technology and the entire electronics industry based on it, enabling computers and the information age. The development of lasers found applications in many areas of our current technologies; we use them for printers, storing and retrieving information using CDs, industrial welding, medical surgery, and for range finding and communication purposes. Medical imaging using MRI is now a routine instrument, as are precision measurements using tunneling and atomic force microscopes. Superconducting technologies are used for high magnetic fields and many more current technologies are based on and enabled by the laws of quantum physics. While the framework of quantum physics has thus proven to be extremely successful and powerful, throughout the last century there were many conceptual, and to some extent philosophical, discussions on our understanding of quantum physics. As early as the 1930s, Einstein and Schrödinger realized that quantum physics allows for some peculiar states, which Schrödinger called “entangled”, which have a non-local character and thus do find an easy interpretation in our classical world. It took a few more decades until John Bell conceived a way to quantify such states, which thus became amenable to measurements. Only in the eighties and nineties of the last century did the generation of entangled states, their characterization and their subsequent application become feasible and accessible in laboratories. Early on, Bell states were proposed for applications in quantum communication, employing protocols based on teleportation. Soon, entanglement was recognized to be useful also for sensing, for precision measurements and eventually for quantum information processing. Starting with the early concept of a trapped-ion quantum computer introduced by Ignacio Cirac and Peter Zoller in 1995, many other platforms were proposed for quantum information processing, based on superconducting quantum bits, photonic processes, engineered quantum dots and many more. The first decade of the 21st century saw an explosive development of quantum information physics, which is by now a mature field and increasingly focuses on applications. Worldwide efforts are ongoing to realize quantum networks for secure communication and to implement quantum computers. Enhanced sensing has been demonstrated using advanced quantum states, and quantum simulators have been developed, already tackling problems that are hard to compute with classical computers. While architectures for full-fledged quantum computers are already available, the realization of such computers still requires the routine implementation of error correction, which is not yet available, for full scalability. Currently, noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) processors are already used for computations and are even accessible via cloud services. Since about 2000, quantum technologies have been developed for many platforms with the aim to surpass the capablities of their classical counterparts. Many such devices now make use of entangled states, which are seen as the new resource for advanced quantum technologies. For this, describing, understanding and generally mastering the generation and manipulation of entanglement is a key element. Moreover, both hardware and software technologies have to be improved in order to better control quantum devices. Mastering quantum phenomena for communication, metrology, simulation and computation purposes is currently one of the hottest topics in science since the wide applicability of quantum technologies will revolutionize these fields. The development of advanced quantum technologies is thus seen worldwide as a strategic area for generating technical knowledge and industrial evolution. This special issue intends to showcase the breadth and impact of the ongoing research in advancing quantum technologies. We have invited a selection of renowned scientists to present their work, and we are confident that this issue will find a broad readership and attract much interest within the scientific community.