Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums
Privacy Policy |
Please read our Terms
of Service | Signup and
Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu.... uh, User
Mike Casey
Postmaster
Reged: 11/11/04
Posts: 5923
Loc: Pasadena CA
|
|
Observations of the cosmic microwave background might deal blow to theory.
Quantum mechanics has always been about uncertainty. Now even that uncertainty might be uncertain
--------------------
Mike (tVA)
I am here to tell you the Truth. We have been created as slaves to be used as batteries for an alien race. You must give up everything you hold dear in this illusionary world so that you may save yourself in the real world.
|
Dipole
sage
Reged: 12/21/06
Posts: 398
Loc: Right behind you
|
|
Nice read, thanks Mike!
I don't really like the title though. It's more like quantum mechanics might not be quite right! Single quantum events have been observed. Quantum theory works to a pretty good level. This new observation, if confirmed would indicate we've got more work to do!
|
HiggsBoson
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 02/21/07
Posts: 807
Loc: Kal-li-fornia
|
|
Point 1: Bohmian mechanics is not an alternative theory it is a non-standard interpretation of quantum mechanics. The same one posed by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen decades ago.
Point 2. This interpretation was proposed by David Bohm. It an extension of the work of Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen, EPR, who did not accept that a particle has no definite value for a quantum number prior to observation.
Point 3. Experimentation done in the late 70s and early 80s at Berkeley and Texas A&M showed that EPR were wrong. ( for details see Chapter 4 Entangling Space in ‘The Fabric of the Cosmos’.)
Point 4. It is not clear to me that if the CMB shows what Dr Valentini expects that this proves QM is wrong. It is also possible that other elements of the theory from which the CMB was derived are in error. This would have to be sorted out at that time.
Conclusion:
The article presents the idea as if it is a new one and suggest that most physics are somehow on the fence on this issue. The Bohmian interpretation has too many problems to list here. I am not saying that the idea is wrong, only that the article did not sufficiently disclose its origins and short comings. For example the fact that experimental evidence exist to support the standard interpretation and exclude the Bohmian view. No matter what is seen in the CMB the experimental evidence for the standard interpretation still stands.
--------------------
Michael
ATM: 6" F/9 Newtonian Travel Scope
ATM: 12.5" F/4.5 Real Soon Now...
|
|
1 registered and 2 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: llanitedave
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 221
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 