Great article on a new (to me) theory in Physics

[disappoint]

http://discovermagazine.com/2005/jun/cover

Ever wonder why a subatomic particle can exist in 2 places at once according to Quantum Mechanics but you can't?

This article answers that and I'll quickly summarize the answer.

Essentially what physicist Roger Penrose is saying is that at the subatomic level, gravity is too weak to cause the superposition of a subatomic particle to collapse. In macro objects like human beings for example, gravity is strong enough to collapse the superposition so fast that macro objects become one almost instantaneously.

The article goes into far more detail than my summary and if you like physics I urge you to take some time to read it at your leisure.

It never occurred to me to answer the dilemma in this way so I was intrigued.

The article mentioned other physicists who are skeptical so I was curious what the physics buffs here thought of this explanation.

 

[flexy]

Argh...wonderful QM nonsense

According to classic fundamentals of QT we cannot know ALL states of a particle, if we know its speed we can not know its location and vice versa. Google Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.

We're using concepts which in QT/QM simply don't apply, such as "exist in places"....uncertainty principle says clearly we cannot know "the place" of a subatomic particle.

As for the particle (aka waveform) collapse, here we don't even know yet WHAT makes the waveform "collapse" respective whether this collapse (the entering from superimposed state into a definite state) is actually happening.

Some theorize the collapse is caused by the observer, some go so far as to say its caused be consciousness. Some say there is no "collapse" (eg state transition) whatsoever, everything exist in "multiple parallel universes", aka the cat is dead in one and alive in the other, the "collapse" doesn't actually happen.

If I learned anything from reading a bit on QT/QM...it's that very little of it is "proven" as fact...that classic (ie. Copenhagen interpretation) doesn't make any sense and is now even questioned by many....short: Who knows, maybe all that QT/QM is hoagwash. This includes things like entanglement.

 

[disappoint]

Some theorize the collapse is caused by the observer, some go so far as to say its caused be consciousness.

Are you trying to be funny?

 

[PowerEngineer]

Are you trying to be funny?

No, I do not think he is.

What is often referred to (rightly or wrongly) as the Copenhagen interpretation:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_interpretation

The apparent fact that quantum states can be indeterminate (with probabilities determined by their wave functions) up until there is an attempt to measure the quantum state (at which time its wave function collapses to a single 100% probability for its measured state) seems to place great importance on the act of measurement. And it is asserted by some that this act of measurement requires that there be an observer of the measurement. If this is true, then one has to wonder what a universe without intelligent life (and therefore no observers and perhaps no collapsing wave functions) would be like.

I have a hard time accepting this as a possibility, but (as flexy notes) the laws of quantum mechanics have an "Alice in Wonderland" logic to them that defy what we call "common sense". All we can really understand is that quantum mechanics very accurately describes reality.

 

[MongGrel]

Quantum Theory has been even expanded a lot to biological functions lately, not that it was a surprise to me.

Quantum entanglement is pretty much established as a valid theory these days as far as I know.

There are things going on at a level still way beyond levels that can be explained, people did not used to know what a microbe was, let alone atoms on a sub level.

I would not be surprised if there are levels beyond quantum physics, which still have not been unraveled.

I'm all for any article that makes people think

 

[flexy]

Are you trying to be funny?

Absolutely not.

The idea that the "collapse" of the wavefunction (ie: the transition from Quantum uncertainty into a defined state) is *caused* by consciousness is actually seriously debated.

This would have "mind boggling" and more or less abstruse implications, like the theory that was proposed not too long ago that it is actually our observations and measurements itself which affect(ed) the age of the universe. (Eg. we "aged" the universe by our observation...as far as I recall the article)

(I googled this but couldn't find the link anymore, it was published maybe a month ago).