If you have an idea for a blog post or a new forum thread, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org, with a summary of the topic and its source (e.g., an academic paper, conference talk, external blog post or news item).
Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use
By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use
RSS feed | RSS help
Introduction
Terms of Use
By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use
RSS feed | RSS help
FQXi FORUM
June 20, 2013
CATEGORY:
Ultimate Reality
[back]
TOPIC: Quantum Mechanics without time and the measurement problem [refresh]
TOPIC: Quantum Mechanics without time and the measurement problem [refresh]
FQXi Member T. P. Singh of the Tata Institute in Mumbai, India, kindly provided us with slides from a talk he delivered last summer in Trieste, Italy. The topic was his team's research into Quantum Mechanics without time and the measurement problem.
We'd like to share the slides here so that interested parties can discuss Dr. Singh's work.
attachments: DFTTrieste_talk.pdf
report post as inappropriate
We'd like to share the slides here so that interested parties can discuss Dr. Singh's work.
attachments: DFTTrieste_talk.pdf
report post as inappropriate
You can find another interesting article from Dr. Singh and collaborators on the topic of foundations of quantum mechanics, on the arxiv here. This article is coauthored by another FQXi Member, Hendrik Ulbricht of Southampton University.
report post as inappropriate
report post as inappropriate
Dr Singh states in the abstract of his arxiv paper, in relation to quantum mechanics:"The theory is not contradicted by any experiment."
You may be interested in a set of experiments that do clearly contradict quantum mechanics. It is in the 2012 FQXI essay contest:
A Challenge to Quantized Absorption by Experiment and Theory
A singly emitted quanta of light should go one way or another at a beam splitter. There should not be coincident detections in a pair of detectors past a beam splitter except by chance. Using singly emitted gamma-rays, I show coincident detection rates greatly exceeding chance. I explain why gamma-rays are necessary to see through the photon-model illusion. A similar set of experiments were also performed with alpha-rays, greatly exceeding chance. A convincing version of the experiment is simple enough for a student of physics to re-enact with a single gamma detector and pulse height analyzer. I explain it with the Loading Theory, and seems to resolve the measurement problem. Hope you like the essay. Eric Reiter, 8/2012
report post as inappropriate
You may be interested in a set of experiments that do clearly contradict quantum mechanics. It is in the 2012 FQXI essay contest:
A Challenge to Quantized Absorption by Experiment and Theory
A singly emitted quanta of light should go one way or another at a beam splitter. There should not be coincident detections in a pair of detectors past a beam splitter except by chance. Using singly emitted gamma-rays, I show coincident detection rates greatly exceeding chance. I explain why gamma-rays are necessary to see through the photon-model illusion. A similar set of experiments were also performed with alpha-rays, greatly exceeding chance. A convincing version of the experiment is simple enough for a student of physics to re-enact with a single gamma detector and pulse height analyzer. I explain it with the Loading Theory, and seems to resolve the measurement problem. Hope you like the essay. Eric Reiter, 8/2012
report post as inappropriate
This is just the area of physics that interests me: resolving the long standing problems presented by Quantum Mechanics, i.e. the measurement problem. I shall have to keep an eye on Dr Singh's work and any research that it prompts; it does look very promising.
Although it is unlikely to compete with the well thought out theories of mainstream academics, I, myself, have put forward a new interpretation of quantum mechanics which does solve the measurement problem and the actual time asymmetry of wavefunction collapse.
Currently the concept is in its early stages and will certainly need a much more rigorous mathematical description (unfortunately, I am not noteworthy enough to have my pre-prints on arXiv so it is on viXra instead): Quantum Theory in the context of a block universe model
In my interpretation, as in Hugh Everett's "many worlds", all outcomes of wavefunction collapse are realised however, since there is no 'present moment'; each event is casually disconnected from all others - in this way instead of space-time being thought of as one continuous Lorentz manifold, it is thought of as each event constituting individual, separate manifolds much like fibres of a bundle.
report post as inappropriate
Although it is unlikely to compete with the well thought out theories of mainstream academics, I, myself, have put forward a new interpretation of quantum mechanics which does solve the measurement problem and the actual time asymmetry of wavefunction collapse.
Currently the concept is in its early stages and will certainly need a much more rigorous mathematical description (unfortunately, I am not noteworthy enough to have my pre-prints on arXiv so it is on viXra instead): Quantum Theory in the context of a block universe model
In my interpretation, as in Hugh Everett's "many worlds", all outcomes of wavefunction collapse are realised however, since there is no 'present moment'; each event is casually disconnected from all others - in this way instead of space-time being thought of as one continuous Lorentz manifold, it is thought of as each event constituting individual, separate manifolds much like fibres of a bundle.
report post as inappropriate
Brendan thank you for this. I do appreciate all of the helpful resources, articles and food for thought provided by this site and the FQXi members and community.
It is interesting to see what other people have been working on and how it is presented. Rather than discussing Dr.Singhs work right now I'd like to wait until after the competition closing. He may also have another entry to this years competition to share, which may include what he has been working on.
report post as inappropriate
It is interesting to see what other people have been working on and how it is presented. Rather than discussing Dr.Singhs work right now I'd like to wait until after the competition closing. He may also have another entry to this years competition to share, which may include what he has been working on.
report post as inappropriate
Dear Tejinder,
You are on the right path to understanding the quantum nature of our being.
There is only one absoulte individual quantum entity (singularity) and the entire universe is in it. There is no space unless one chooses to measure and there is no time until one chooses to count. There is no space-time besides one absolute self. I have put forth the universal truth in the following topic
Conscience is the cosmological constant.
Love,
Sridattadev.
report post as inappropriate
You are on the right path to understanding the quantum nature of our being.
There is only one absoulte individual quantum entity (singularity) and the entire universe is in it. There is no space unless one chooses to measure and there is no time until one chooses to count. There is no space-time besides one absolute self. I have put forth the universal truth in the following topic
Conscience is the cosmological constant.
Love,
Sridattadev.
report post as inappropriate
I have read the PPP carefully and think it is a little bit funny; I explain.
The goal is to describe QM without time and the measurement problem. What means the description of reality without phenomena.
Reality without phenomena is "the unknown universe" of the absolute time and absolute space of Isaac Newton. And that in contrast of the commen time and commen space: the "empiric world" of Albert Einstein. Whithout phenomena no curved spacetime.
A universe without phenomena consist of flat fields. So everywhere, there is een flat scarlar field and there is a flat vector field and they don't interchange: the abstract world of the MUH (mathematical universe hypothesis). Theoretical physicist manage applied mathematics to describe the relations between the phenomena, so the team have to make up there mind. Will they remain theoretical physicist or will they become philosophers/mathematicians?
Suppose they make the right decision...
They will soon realize that science = phenomena. Even ontology is for the most part a description of the relations between - classification of - phenomena. Despite this they have to describe static space (flat fields) and have to orientate themselves in this ERH (external reality hypothesis).
Suppose the group succeed. They describe the elements of the set (space), recognize the topological attribute, discover the mechanism that take charge of the separation of one field (the infinity set) into a vectorfield and a scarlar field, realize themselves that the universe is “analog” but interchanges “digital” and... (we are now near page 12 of the PPP) they want to keep on with fulfilling the dreams of a “lousy” physicist: stumbling within common space and common time. That’s funny.
report post as inappropriate
The goal is to describe QM without time and the measurement problem. What means the description of reality without phenomena.
Reality without phenomena is "the unknown universe" of the absolute time and absolute space of Isaac Newton. And that in contrast of the commen time and commen space: the "empiric world" of Albert Einstein. Whithout phenomena no curved spacetime.
A universe without phenomena consist of flat fields. So everywhere, there is een flat scarlar field and there is a flat vector field and they don't interchange: the abstract world of the MUH (mathematical universe hypothesis). Theoretical physicist manage applied mathematics to describe the relations between the phenomena, so the team have to make up there mind. Will they remain theoretical physicist or will they become philosophers/mathematicians?
Suppose they make the right decision...
They will soon realize that science = phenomena. Even ontology is for the most part a description of the relations between - classification of - phenomena. Despite this they have to describe static space (flat fields) and have to orientate themselves in this ERH (external reality hypothesis).
Suppose the group succeed. They describe the elements of the set (space), recognize the topological attribute, discover the mechanism that take charge of the separation of one field (the infinity set) into a vectorfield and a scarlar field, realize themselves that the universe is “analog” but interchanges “digital” and... (we are now near page 12 of the PPP) they want to keep on with fulfilling the dreams of a “lousy” physicist: stumbling within common space and common time. That’s funny.
report post as inappropriate
Quantum mechanics rest on our understanding of the wave function. Mathematician recently produced a proof which proved wave functions are not just mathematical tools but real structures. About eleven months before that proof, the Indian Journal of Science and Technology published my research which successfully isolated wave functions within the motion of binary stars. Anne Astronomy News reported the findings.
http://annesastronomynews.com/double-stars-mysterio
us-connection/
In layman's terms, a space wave is a wave function.
report post as inappropriate
http://annesastronomynews.com/double-stars-mysterio
us-connection/
In layman's terms, a space wave is a wave function.
report post as inappropriate