05-01-2004, 04:41 PM
|
#14 (permalink)
|
|
Wehret Den Anfängen!
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
Quote:
|
As I understand it, the view presented in this book is that a quantum state does *not* apply to a single system (like your single electron), but to a (large or infinite) ensemble of similarly prepared systems. The implication would seem to be that the individual particle does have definite values of whatever dynamical quantities you're interested in - it's just that you won't know what they are until you measure them, and when you do, and if you repeat the measurement for a sufficiently large ensemble of similarly prepared systems, you will find your probability distribution emerging - which is the only thing you *can* predict. The most obvious example is the double-slit experiment. Trying it with a normal light source is essentially trying it with gazillions of similar systems at once. Try it with single photons, but repeatedly, and you still get the interference pattern building up.
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics
Quote:
|
Albert Einstein, himself one of the founders of quantum theory, disliked this loss of determinism in measurement. He held that quantum mechanics must be incomplete, and produced a series of objections to the theory. The most famous of these was the EPR paradox. John Stewart Bell's theoretical solution to the EPR paradox, and its later experimental verification, disproved a large class of such hidden variable theories and persuaded the majority of physicists that quantum mechanics is not an approximation to a nominally classical hidden-variable theory.
|
Also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpr...ntum_mechanics
I assume he is ok with faster-than-light communication between particles?
It sounds like the Bohm interpretation.
__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.
Last edited by Yakk; 05-01-2004 at 04:53 PM..
|
|
|