FORUM, Forum Discussion, Forum Gratuit, Nom de domaine, Nom de domaine gratuit, Redirection gratuite,

Forum Physiks Causali  Administrators :saucer, Iseason, us2u
Forum Physiks Causali
Not logged | Login
Online:There are 5 online. Click here to see more
Register Register | Profile Profile | Private messages Private messages | Search Search | Online Online | Help Help | Create a free blog

forum Forum index forumQM notes 1 forumProbabilities in Quantum Mechanics ...

Author : Topic: Probabilities in Quantum Mechanics ...  Bottom
 saucer
 admin
 Posts : 673
 A Good Tautology is Hard to Find!
 saucer
  Posted 09/01/2007 02:38:34 AM
Send a private message to saucer
-

Probabilities in Quantum Mechanics and
the Preparation of Dynamical Properties


Exploring the double slit experiment, we find that quantum mechanics makes only statistical predictions about the results of measurements. A typical experiment consists of preparation, interaction, and measurement.The notion of preparation is an important conceptual foundation in the study of quantum mechanics. It is introduced by considering Newton´s prism experiment. The results show in which way the notions of preparation, quantum mechanical state and wave function are interconnected.




http://web.phys.ksu.edu/vqmorig/tutorials/online/prep/


-

 zee
 Posts : 115
  Posted 30/01/2007 10:52:21 AM
Send a private message to zee


http://wwwcg.in.tum.de/Teaching/SS2006/HighPrakt/photon.png

 saucer
 admin
 Posts : 673
 A Good Tautology is Hard to Find!
 saucer
  Posted 01/06/2007 09:07:41 AM
Send a private message to saucer
-

MAX BORN ~



Quantum Mechanics, from 1900 to 1930, revolutionised the foundations of our understanding of light and matter interactions. In 1900 Max Planck showed that light energy must be emitted and absorbed in discrete 'quanta' to explain blackbody radiation. Albert Einstein in 1905 showed that the energy of light is determined by its frequency, where E=hf. Then in the late 1920s, Louis de Broglie and Erwin Schrodinger introduced the concept of Standing Waves to explain these discrete frequency and energy states of light and matter (standing waves only exist at discrete frequencies and thus
energy states).





Max Born (1928) was the first to discover (by chance and with no theoretical foundation) that the square of the quantum wave equations (described by the Wave Structure of Matter as Wave-Density) could be used to predict the probability of where the particle would be found. Since it was impossible for both the waves and the particles to be real entities, it became customary to regard the waves as unreal probability waves and to maintain the belief in the 'real' particle. Unfortunately (profoundly) this maintained the belief in the particle/wave duality, in a new form where the 'quantum' scalar standing waves had become 'probability waves' for the 'real' particle.

Albert Einstein unfortunately agreed with this probability wave interpretation, as he believed in continuous force fields (not in waves or particles) thus to him it was sensible that the waves were not real, and were mere descrïptions of probabilities. He writes;

On the basis of quantum theory there was obtained a surprisingly good representation of an immense variety of facts which otherwise appeared entirely incomprehensible. But on one point, curiously enough, there was failure: it proved impossible to associate with these Schrodinger waves definite motions of the mass points - and that, after all, had been the original purpose of the whole construction. The difficulty appeared insurmountable until it was overcome by Born in a way as simple as it was unexpected. The de Broglie-Schrodinger wave fields were not to be interpreted as a mathematical descrïption of how an event actually takes place in time and space, though, of course, they have reference to such an event. Rather they are a mathematical descrïption of what we can actually know about the system. They serve only to make statistical statements and predictions of the results of all measurements which we can carry out upon the system. (Albert Einstein, on Quantum Physics, 1940)

It seems to be clear, therefore, that Born's statistical interpretation of quantum physics is the only possible one. The wave function does not in any way describe a state which could be that of a single system; it relates rather to many systems, to an 'ensemble of systems' in the sense of statistical mechanics. (Albert Einstein, on Quantum Mechanics, 1936)

Albert Einstein is correct in one sense, mistaken in another. It is true that matter is intimately interconnected to all the other matter in the universe by the Spherical In and Out-Waves, something quantum theory discovered but never correctly understood.
This has become known as quantum entanglement and relates to the famous experiment posed by Albert Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) and when later technology allowed its experimental testing, it confirmed quantum theory's entanglement. Albert Einstein assumed this interconnectedness was due to the spherical spatially extended field structure of matter, instead, it is due to the interaction of the spherical spatially extended Standing Waves of matter with other matter's Wave-Centers distant in Space. Explaining this Standing Wave interaction of matter with other matter in the Space around it (action-at-a-distance) is largely the purpose of these physics articles and is one of the great powers of the Metaphysics of Space and Motion and the Spherical Wave Structure of Matter.

Nonetheless, Albert Einstein was very close to the truth. He realised that because matter is spherically spatially extended we must give up the idea of complete localization and knowledge of the 'particle' in a theoretical model. For the particle is nothing but the Wave-Center of a Spherical Standing Wave, and thus can never be isolated as an entity in itself, but is dependent on its interactions with all the other Matter in the Universe. And it is this lack of knowledge of the system as a whole that is the ultimate cause of the uncertainty and resultant probability inherent in Quantum Physics.

Thus the last and most successful creation of theoretical physics, namely quantum mechanics (QM), differs fundamentally from both Newton's mechanics, and Maxwell's e-m field. For the quantities which figure in QM's laws make no claim to describe physical reality itself, but only probabilities of the occurrence of a physical reality that we have in view. (Albert Einstein, 1931)
I cannot but confess that I attach only a transitory importance to this interpretation. I still believe in the possibility of a model of reality - that is to say, of a theory which represents things themselves and not merely the probability of their occurrence. On the other hand, it seems to me certain that we must give up the idea of complete localization of the particle in a theoretical model. This seems to me the permanent upshot of Heisenberg's principle of uncertainty. (Albert Einstein, on Quantum Physics, 1934)

Albert Einstein believed that Reality could be represented by spherical force fields, that reality was not founded on chance (as Bohr and Heisenberg argued) but on necessary connections between things (thus his comment 'God does not play dice'!). He was largely correct, Matter is necessarily connected due to the Spherical Standing Wave Structure of Matter, but due to lack of knowledge of the system as a whole (the Universe), and the fact that it is impossible to determine an Infinite system (of which our finite spherical universe is a part - see Cosmology), then this gives rise to the chance and uncertainty found in Quantum Mechanics....




Courtesy:  
spaceandmotion.com

-  

--Last edited by saucer on 2007-06-01 09:14:02 --


forum Forum index forumQM notes 1 forumProbabilities in Quantum Mechanics ...
top
Go to :
  Add a quick reply

Add a quick reply