Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
Yesterday at 06:41 AM

Lights on the way
by akay
April 27, 2024, 01:26 PM

New Britain
April 27, 2024, 08:42 AM

What's happened to the fo...
April 27, 2024, 08:30 AM

Qur'anic studies today
April 23, 2024, 02:50 AM

Do humans have needed kno...
April 20, 2024, 08:02 AM

Do humans have needed kno...
April 19, 2024, 12:17 AM

Iran launches drones
April 13, 2024, 05:56 PM

عيد مبارك للجميع! ^_^
by akay
April 12, 2024, 12:01 PM

Eid-Al-Fitr
by akay
April 12, 2024, 08:06 AM

Mock Them and Move on., ...
January 30, 2024, 05:44 AM

Pro Israel or Pro Palesti...
January 29, 2024, 08:53 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Causality and Determinism in Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity

 (Read 3441 times)
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Causality and Determinism in Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity
     OP - July 09, 2014, 12:59 AM

    I have a question for science lovers of this this forum.  I have heard that the Quantum world is essentially random, but to me this seems impossible.  I have also heard that the laws of cause and effect start to break down at the Quantum level.  Can somebody please explain to me the differences regarding causality and determinism within and between the two fields of Quantum Mechanics and The Theory(ies) of General and Special Relativity?
  • Causality and Determinism in Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity
     Reply #1 - July 09, 2014, 01:47 AM

    http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/determinism-causal/#QuaMec
  • Causality and Determinism in Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity
     Reply #2 - July 09, 2014, 04:48 AM

    I've enjoyed all of your questions and posts so far Radon,  interesting. 

    x

  • Causality and Determinism in Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity
     Reply #3 - July 09, 2014, 05:06 AM

    suki,

    Thank you very much for your appreciation!  I like to know that what I have to say and ask is appreciated!
  • Causality and Determinism in Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity
     Reply #4 - July 09, 2014, 09:47 AM

    Quantum mechanics is a theory that gives predictions on probabilities for different outcomes of measurements. QM allows us to calculate only the probability that, for example, an electron will be observed at various places. In QM, there is a a deterministic unitary evolution with time of the wave-function (quantum state of a system) as well as a probabilistic change as the wave-function collapses due to observation/measurement. However it is important to note that these ideas are only the standard form (CI) of QM; there are hypotheses that there are hidden, deterministic variables. The best case of a hidden-variable extension of QM is Bohmian mechanics.
  • Causality and Determinism in Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity
     Reply #5 - July 09, 2014, 09:55 AM

    It should be noted as well that this question really belongs in the philosophy section.  Smiley
  • Causality and Determinism in Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity
     Reply #6 - July 09, 2014, 10:53 AM

     Cheesy

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Causality and Determinism in Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity
     Reply #7 - July 09, 2014, 11:08 AM

    This documentary helped me understand QM a little better. I think I've watch it twice now. I don't think I have been more confused...  Huh?

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z8Ma2YT8vY

    "...after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it." Buddha
  • Causality and Determinism in Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity
     Reply #8 - July 11, 2014, 08:55 PM

    Cheesy

    Quote
    Galison compares Feynman and Einstein, writing as follows (numbers are attached by me): Einstein never lost his fascination for philosophy; Feynman found philosophers nothing but a burden. Einstein came to believe that physical reality lay deep in mathematical physics; Feynman never gave up hoping for a physics driven, at bottom, by an almost tactile intuition. Much of Einstein's life found him cast and self-cast as an oracle; Feynman preferred the persona of a fast-draw street-smart kid.

    I somewhat lean towards Feynman. I generally dislike talking about philosophy. Still, I occasionally feel it's inevitable, and do sometimes enjoy some of philosophical ideas that are derived from scientific theories.   
  • Causality and Determinism in Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity
     Reply #9 - July 21, 2014, 03:09 AM

    I'm mostly asking Descent as our resident future physicist but this really goes out to everyone, have you ever heard of Alice in Quantumland: An Allegory of Quantum Physics? It is, in my opinion, a truly wonderful reimagining of Alice in Wonderland and modern physics written in 1995 by particle physicist Robert Gilmore, who has under his belt experience at Stanford and CERN. I'll just put a few snapshots here. Smiley



    Quote
    In the first half of the twentieth century, our understanding in the Universe was turned upside down. The old classical theories of physics were replaced by a new way of looking at the world — quantum mechanics. This is in many ways at variance with the ideas of the older Newtonian mechanics; indeed, in many ways it is at variance with our common sense. Nevertheless, the strangest thing about these theories is their extraordinary success in predicting the observed behavior of physical systems. However nonsensical quantum mechanics may at times appear to us, that seems to be the way that Nature wants it — and so we have to play along.

    This book is an allegory of quantum physics, in the dictionary sense of “a narrative describing one subject under the guise of another.” The way that things behave in quantum mechanics seems very odd to our normal way of thinking and is made more acceptable when we consider analogies to situations with which we are all familiar, even though the analogies may be inexact. Such analogies can never be very true to reality as quantum processes are really quite different from our normal experience.

    […]

    The Quantumland in which Alice travels is rather like a theme park in which Alice is sometimes an observer, while sometimes she behaves as a sort of particle with varying electric charge. This Quantumland shows the essential features of the quantum world: the world that we all inhabit.




    Quote
    While much of the narrative might appear nonsensical at first sight, “and possibly it may seem so at the second, third, and twenty-fifth sight as well,” Gilmore reminds us that this is the very point of the exercise. He cites godfather of quantum mechanics:


    Neils Bohr … is said to have remarked that anyone who did not feel dizzy when thinking about quantum theory had not understood it.<




    Quote
    And so, Alice’s journey is off to a properly dizzying start as she falls into a contemporary rabbit hole — the swirling, sparkling TV screen — and ends up in Quantumland. There, we follow her as she visits the Heisenberg Bank and the Mechanics Institute, learning about the curiouser and curiouser behaviors of particles. She marvels at the Uncertain Accountant, whose attempts to balance books are befuddled by energy fluctuations driven by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The State Agent shows her that, thanks to the Pauli Exclusion Principle, a particle can be two places at once.




    Quote
    She meets the Classical Mechanic and the Quantum Mechanic, who demonstrate the difference between Newtonian physics and quantum physics in a game of billiards:


    “Excuse me, is this the Mechanics Institute, please?” asked Alice, mostly for the sake of making conversation. She knew from the notice outside that it must be.

    “Yes, my dear girl,” said the taller and more impressive looking off the two. “I myself am a Classical Mechanic from ClassicWorld, and I am visiting my colleague here, who is a Quantum Mechanic. Whatever your problem is, I am sure that between us we will be able to assist you, if you would just wait a moment while we finish our shots.

    Both men turned back to the billiards table. The Classical Mechanic took careful aim, clearly judging all the angles involved to within a tiny fraction of a degree. At last, he very deliberately played his shot. The ball bounced to and fro in a remarkable series of ricochets, ending in a collision with the red ball and knocking it squarely into the center of a hole. “There you are,” he exclaimed with satisfaction as he retrieved the ball from the pocket. “That is the way to do it, you know; careful and exact observation followed by precise action. If you do things that way you can produce any result you choose.

    His companion did not respond, but took his place at the table and made a vague stab with his cue. . . . The ball shot off in every direction at once, so that there was no part of the table where [Alice] could say definitely that the ball had not gone, though equally she could in no way say where it actually was. After a moment the player went over and peered into one of the pockets, then reached in and drew out a red ball.

    “If you do not mind me saying so,” said Alice, “you do seem to play the game very differently.”




    Quote
    Some adventures later, Alice meets the Little Mermaid, from whom she learns about the theory of many worlds:


    “As you know,” she began in a liquid, musical voice, “I am a creature of two worlds. I live in the sea and am equally at home upon the land. But this is as nothing compared with the number of worlds which we all inhabit, for we are all citizens of many worlds — many, many worlds. . . .

    The quantum rules … apply to the whole world, to everything. There is no limit to the idea of the superposition of states. When an observer looks at a superposition of quantum states you would expect him or her to see all of the effects that are appropriate to the selection of states present. This is what does happen; one observer does see all the results, or rather the observer also is in a superposition of different states, and each state of the observer has seen the result that goes with one of the states, in the original mixture. Each state is simply extended to include the observer in the act of seeing that particular state.

    This is not the way that it seems to us, but that is because the different states of the observer are not aware of one another. When an electron passes through a screen with two slits in it, then it might pass through to the left or to the right. What you observe to happen is pure chance. You might see that the electron has gone to the left, but there will be another you that will have seen the electron go to the right. At the point at which you observe the electron, you split into two versions of yourself, one to see each possible result. If these two versions never get together again, then each remains totally unaware of the other’s existence. The world has split into two worlds with slightly different versions of you in them. . . .”




    Quote
    In fact, the most interesting chapter of the book deals with this notion of two versions of oneself, exploring virtual reality as Alice collides with a backwards version of herself, an anti-Alice, while strolling in a beautiful flower garden with the Quantum Mechanic. To understand what made that encounter possible, Alice visits the State Agent, who presents her with an apparatus for seeing the virtual particles of antimatter.




    Quote
    What’s particularly remarkable about this passage is that in addition to serving the allegorical purposes of Gilmore’s quantum story, it also presages with astounding prescience augmented reality tools like Google Glass nearly twenty years before their existence:


    [The State Agent brought out] a large and highly technical-looking helmet. This had a transparent visor which entirely covered the front, and there was a long cable attached to a socket at the back. The cable snaked away along the path by which he had come until it was lost from sight in the distance. “Here it is,” he said triumphantly, “a marvel of modern technology. Just put this on, and you will see the world of virtual particles.”

    Alice felt a little nervous as she contemplated the helmet. It was large, and it looked very complicated and even, she felt, a little sinister. However, if this was going to reveal the virtual particles she had heard mentioned so often, she was prepared to try it. She put the helmet on her head. It was very heavy. The Agent reached across to the helmet and made some adjustment at the side of her head, where Alice was unable to see. The view through the visor clouded over with little sparkling dots and…

    When her view through the visor cleared, it had dramatically changed. Alice could still see the electrons in their various levels, but now instead of their appearing to be within a tall building she saw them as enmeshed in a network of vivid lines which joined one electron to another, so that they looked as much as anything like flies caught in some great spider’s web of shining strands. . . .


    Quote
    Here, Gilmore slips in some equally prescient and rather ominous commentary on the greed that motivates those eager to exploit technological innovation:


    As Alice was watching this strange scene with interest, the helmet emitted a whirring noise beside her ear, followed immediately by a loud “clunk.” The view in front of her shimmered and returned to the mundane view she had seen before she put on the helmet. Alice exclaimed aloud in annoyance at losing the fascinating picture. “I am sorry,” said the Agent. “I am afraid that there is a timer built into the mechanism. I had intended to make it coin-operated, you see.”




    Quote
    Despite his mercantile motives, the Agent explains to Alice how the photons she just observed through the virtual reality helmet explain her encounter in the garden:


    “What happened to you would have appeared to the rest of the world as an unusually high-energy photon giving up its energy to create an Alice and an anti-Alice. The anti-Alice would travel along until it collided with an Alice and the two mutually annihilated one another, converting their energy back to photons.”

    “How can that be?” cried Alice in some dismay. “I do not see how this anti-Alice could ever have found a second Alice to collide with anyway. There is only one of me and I certainly haven’t been annihilated,” she concluded defiantly.

    “Ah, but what I have just described is how it would appear to the rest of the world. How it would appear to you is quite different, quite different altogether. For you the annihilation would come before the creation of course.”

    “I do not see any ‘of course’ about it,” answered Alice rather sharply. “How can anything be destroyed before it is created?”

    “Why, that is the natural order of things when you are going backward in time. Normally, when you move forward in time you expect creation to come before destruction don’t you?”

    “Yes, of course I do,” replied Alice.

    “Well in that case, if you move backward in time you naturally expect the creation to come after destruction from your point of view. You are experiencing events in reverse order after all. I would have expected you to see that for yourself.

    “In this case you were walking quietly along with the Quantum Mechanic and suddenly you collided with the anti-Alice. As far as your companion was concerned you and the anti-Alice were both utterly destroyed and your mass energy was carried off by high-energy photons.”




    Quote
    Since the notion of multiple simultaneous states is fundamental to quantum mechanics, it’s a recurring theme in Gilmore’s narrative. Later on, Alice visits the Experimental Physics Phun Phair, where the Great Paradoxus, “a tall figure with glossy black hair, a spiky waxed mustache, and a flowing black cloak,” summons two volunteers for an experiment he is demonstrating. Naturally, those are the twins, the Quantumland counterparts to Lewis Carroll’s Tweedledum and Tweedledee:


    Eventually, two people were pushed forward. Both were dressed in long frock coats and narrow trousers, and both had bushy side whiskers. Both wore waistcoats, each with a gold chain attached to a watch which its owner had obviously checked recently against a reliable standard clock. These two were not actually identical to one another, since only particles are completely identical, but they were certainly very much alike. They were obviously both honorable, honest, and reliable as well as being competent and conscientious observers. If they were to say that they had seen something, no one would dream of disputing it.



    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Causality and Determinism in Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity
     Reply #10 - July 21, 2014, 02:31 PM

    Alice in Quantumland was definitely one of the better popular science books I've read.

    If you're interested in learning about QM and have a base in math and introductory physics, I recommend Griffiths' Introductory Quantum Mechanics. If you want more popular science, QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter by Richard Feynman is a good one.
  • Causality and Determinism in Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity
     Reply #11 - July 21, 2014, 02:47 PM

    I just remembered how great the latter book was. Seriously Quod, read that book! You'll love it.
  • Causality and Determinism in Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity
     Reply #12 - July 21, 2014, 03:05 PM

     Afro

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Causality and Determinism in Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's Relativity
     Reply #13 - July 21, 2014, 06:59 PM

    As Descent rightfully pointed out, the question itself is philosophical rather than scientific. The position of a particle is confined to a probability distribution, but it is not random. For example, in a nutshell, in order to propose the observation of causality in quantum mechanical systems, we would have to deal with momentum and coordinate variables of a particle and it would require relatively precise computations of the coordinate and momentum simultaneously, which is impossible due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, as the more precisely the position is determined, the less precisely is the momentum known, and the same applies vice versa. The results we get are complex, not single values, as we could suppose that the determination of causality between a set of values would require several precise matrix systems between variables whose values are co-dependent upon determination (calculation) in a standard quantum mechanical system. It won't "add up" nor would it make sense to truly "explore" it with a standard quantum mechanical system. With Newtonian Physics we can work with isolated systems of a set amount of variables with relative precision, however with QM you have the co-dependency upon observation, which would render causality null in that sense, however, it does not suggest that "causality breaks down in quantum mechanical systems".


  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »