It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I wouldn't say QM has nothing to do with the structure of the universe.
originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: Direne
If QM has nothing to do with the structure of the universe, how did you get the galaxy era without the Planck epoch?
The Standard Model is missing a few puzzle pieces (conspicuously absent are the putative particles that make up dark matter, those that convey the force of gravity, and an explanation for the mass of neutrinos), but it provides an extremely accurate picture of almost all other observed phenomena.
Virtual particles are always popping into and out of existence
So space is never empty
the lowest energy that a classical oscillator can have is zero
originally posted by: Direne
a reply to: neoholographic
Neo, it is sad that your rude manners destroyed any opportunity of having a fruitful exchange of ideas. As for me, this thread is definitely dead. You turned it into a monologue. However, I forgive you.
On the basis of three physical axioms, we prove that if the choice of a particular type of spin 1 experiment is not a function of the information accessible to the experimenters, then its outcome is equally not a function of the information accessible to the particles. We show that this result is robust, and deduce that neither hidden variable theories nor mechanisms of the GRW type for wave function collapse can be made relativistic. We also establish the consistency of our axioms and discuss the philosophical implications.
Recent experiments have put relatively large objects into quantum states, illuminating the processes by which the ordinary world emerges out of the quantum one.
“The most interesting question is if there is some fundamental size where one cannot in some sense make entanglement,” Sillanpää said. “That would mean that something else in addition to normal quantum mechanics enters the picture, and this could be, for example, collapse due to gravity.” If gravity does play a role, that might offer some hints for how to develop a theory of quantum gravity that unites the currently incompatible theories of quantum mechanics and general relativity.
That would be quite a coup for Schrödinger’s kittens. For now, they reinforce the general belief that there is nothing special about quantum behavior, beyond the fact that it spins itself into an ever more tangled cat’s cradle from which our classical web emerges. And no cat need be killed in the process.
Cracks have begun to show in one of quantum’s biggest controversies. The well-known Schrödinger’s cat thought experiment, which sought to illustrate the absurdity of applying quantum theory to the macro-physical world ruled by classical physics has been challenged by a recent advancement in quantum physics. An international team, led by Markus Arndt of the University of Vienna, successfully placed a large molecule of 2,000 atoms—the biggest object yet—into a state of quantum superposition. The advancement shows that quantum effects can be translated into the classical world, establishing the foundations for scientists to continue to demonstrate how the gap between these seemingly disparate worlds might be reconciled.
Sabine Hossenfelder agrees that there are problems with the internal consistency of quantum mechanics. However she disagrees that those inconsistencies mean what some people claim they mean. I made a thread about that here:
originally posted by: neoholographic
Quantum erasing the memory of Wigner's friend
We propose a simple single-photon interferometric setup implementing their scenario, and use our reformulation to shed a new light on the assumptions leading to their paradox. From our description, we argue that the three apparently incompatible properties used to question the consistency of quantum mechanics correspond to two logically distinct contexts:
Wigner's friend is destroying the notion of materialism once again and posing serious questions about the role of the observer, consciousness and is there really an objective reality.