#1
so i was watching a programme last night, that itself regarded quantum physics

and submitted the two main theories of why atoms, and things of similar size do not obey the laws of physics in the way larger objects do;

such as why is it that electrons do not revolve around the nucleus of an atom as a planet does around a sun? but rather in random patterns


so anyway, i was wondering as to the pits ideas on the subject

do you accept the "Cobenhagen Interpretation "?


or believe the more science fiction friendly idea of the "many-worlds interpretation "?


personally i think schrodinger's cat disproves the Copenhagen interpretation


or can anyone share newer theories that i've missed out?
#2
Schrodinger's cat isn't an experiment - it doesn't prove or disprove anything but invites you to think about the importance of the observer in the Copenhagen interpretation.

The Copenhagen interpretation and the many-worlds idea aren't incompatible - they're not competing hypotheses.
#3
I want to be the first to tell you that this thread will receive:

a) nothing

or

b) epic lulz responses.
Quote by imthehitcher
you truly are a prince of men


Quote by isuckhardcore
I get naked FOR my dog.
#4
Ummm... I'm a firm believer in immediate reality. that means if i can see it, touch it, smell it, whatever, then its real, and so long as its real, thats all i need to worry about. ive come to accept that these are question we will not know the answers to for a very long time, if ever at all.
A U S S I E
#5
Quote by smb
Schrodinger's cat isn't an experiment - it doesn't prove or disprove anything but invites you to think about the importance of the observer in the Copenhagen interpretation.



but the point which the 'thought experiment' makes is that the cat cannot exist as both dead and alive, as traditional quantum mechanics suggests
#6
Quote by imthehitcher
but the point which the 'thought experiment' makes is that the cat cannot exist as both dead and alive, as traditional quantum mechanics suggests
I don't think that's the point it is making, nor is the cat being in an indeterminate state ruled out. It's a way of showing the real-world effects of "local non-realism".
#7
I am not a quantam mechanics theorist usually, and I havent read over those theories but I can jump in and offer a theory of my own.

Smaller objects are more prone to being effected by magnetic activity? It is common knowledge that magnetic fields affect different things in defferent ways, they allow the northern lights to be seen (i think it is electromagnetic radiation being reflected off our atmosphere?). Basically I mean that the planets orbit wont be affected by magnetic interference, but smaller molecules may be affected due to the fact that they are analysed on earth which has a strong magnetic south/north pole effect. This may be why the atoms appear to move in random patterns. Has anyone tried analysing atoms in space where they are not affected by the earths magnetic pull?

Does this mean I am now a scientician?
Last edited by Helpy Helperton at May 8, 2008,
#9
many worlds theory was made up by E from eels dad. thats pretty much all i know on it
now extra flamey
#10
Quote by syk3d
I want to be the first to tell you that this thread will receive:

a) nothing

or

b) epic lulz responses.



Shows how much you know about quantum physics
hue
#12
I believe a little bit of both actually, both support the cat in the quantum box hypothesis and explain probability in their wn way, so I believe both are credible, though I sometimes lean more toward the Copenhagen interpretation and waveform collapse.
hue
#13
Quote by imthehitcher
but the point which the 'thought experiment' makes is that the cat cannot exist as both dead and alive, as traditional quantum mechanics suggests


No, tho that is the point Schroedinger intended when he came up with it. It has since become generally accepted that the point is actually that it is in both states until you disturb the state, take an observation and collapse the waveform.
#14
Schrodinger's cat was designed to debunk Cobenhagen Interpritation. Both are theories and theories by design cannot prove or debunk one another as they are not fact, just theories. The truth is we have no idea why electrons behave the way they do, but we've got a couple of guys, a car battery, and cup of really hot tea working on it!
Out here you've gotta know where your towel is!
#15
Quote by ValoRhoads
they are not fact, just theories
I wish people knew what "theory" means in a scientific context.
#16
Quote by smb
I wish people knew what "theory" means in a scientific context.


Even in science, it's still not fact
Out here you've gotta know where your towel is!
#17
Quote by ValoRhoads
Even in science, it's still not fact
The point I was making is that neither Schrodinger's cat nor the Copenhagen interpretation are theories.
#18
Quote by Rocking-Rob
At extremes physics breaks down in general.


+1

But also, after reading through those articles and trying to remember what I studied in school . I think I'd lean more towards the Copenhagen Interpretation, even though it isn't a legitimate theory.
ಥ_ಥ
#19
I find the Copenhagen Interpretation to be a "get out clause" if you will.

Especially when you consider the double slit electron diffraction experiment.

If an beam of electrons is fired at a double slit, one electron at a time, and not directly observed, the pattern on the detector is that of a wave. (Imagine the same thing with a light ray).

If the electron is directly observed, then the system changes and the electron behaves like a particel. The CI says that when a system is directly observed, the wavefunction breaks down.

This I cant deal with since it should not break down if we directly observe it...
Sat in a lab, curing diseases. They actually LET me play with chemicals!
#20
Not sure.

Schrodinger's cat supports the copenhagen interpretation.


Copenhagen interpretation is quite interesting but I don't think we know enough to say whether it's the right one. There are many other ideas out there that are worth looking into.
Is it still a God Complex if I really am God?

America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.
Oscar Wilde
#21
Quote by Guitardude19
I find the Copenhagen Interpretation to be a "get out clause" if you will.

Especially when you consider the double slit electron diffraction experiment.

If an beam of electrons is fired at a double slit, one electron at a time, and not directly observed, the pattern on the detector is that of a wave. (Imagine the same thing with a light ray).

If the electron is directly observed, then the system changes and the electron behaves like a particel. The CI says that when a system is directly observed, the wavefunction breaks down.

This I cant deal with since it should not break down if we directly observe it...


CI is much less of a get out clause than 'many-worlds'. At least copenhagen interpretation gives some kind of meaningful information. Explaining the world in terms of wavefunctions just makes sense when dealing with this sort of problem. Feynman's Sum Over Histories is qualitatively better imho, but Feynman was just awesome in every way.
#22
Quote by Mad_BOB
CI is much less of a get out clause than 'many-worlds'. At least copenhagen interpretation gives some kind of meaningful information. Explaining the world in terms of wavefunctions just makes sense when dealing with this sort of problem. Feynman's Sum Over Histories is qualitatively better imho, but Feynman was just awesome in every way.


+1

I have to say I like the CI, I used to hate it but now I think it's a really elegant and interesting way for the world to work.
Is it still a God Complex if I really am God?

America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.
Oscar Wilde
#23
Quote by Rocking-Rob
At extremes physics breaks down in general.



well ofcourse, we can observe that the question is why does this happen?
#24
I suppose I accept the "Cobenhagen Interpretation," though I don't really know anything about Quantum Mechanics...
sup?