LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for TSE Archives


TSE Archives

TSE Archives


TSE@PO.MISSOURI.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

TSE Home

TSE Home

TSE  September 2006

TSE September 2006

Subject:

Re: Quantum Mechanics

From:

Tabitha Arnesen <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

T. S. Eliot Discussion forum.

Date:

Thu, 14 Sep 2006 13:54:24 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (125 lines)

Thank you Carrol!

i haven't said anything about the Quantum on this list
so far, as it is not exactly my speciality, although i
do know a bit about it.

The main reason I haven't said anything as i have had
experiences of explaining quantum to none physicists
and people with spiritual inclinations, and what
ALWAYS happens is that they igore what im actually
saying and make it mean whatever they choose to
believe it means.

This is incredibly frustrating.

NB - a very good book on quantum, space-time, etc is
The Fabric of the Cosmos by Brian Greene.  If anyone
is actually interested in what EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE
(and not what randomly tying in half understood ideas
with mysticism from centuries ago) tells us, this is a
great and very interesting read.

Tabitha


--- Carrol Cox <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Being somewhat bothered by the some of the
> statements on quantum
> mechanics made on this list, a couple weeks ago I
> queried a physicist
> friend on the topic and got the following reply.
> Carrol
> -----
> 
> something better: a set of experiments that
> presented particle and wave
> properties for one thing, along with several other
> mounting
> contradictions, forced a change in the structure of
> physical theory. the
> resulting theory forced us to better appreciate the
> already existing
> understanding that observing a phenomenon could
> influence the
> phenomenon. 
> 
> more details:  well.........ok, first of all, they
> are confusing two
> separate but related strands: wave-particle duality,
> and the uncertainty
> principle. so one is not "based on" the other. and
> second of all,
> influence of the obersever on the observed is NOT a
> quantum mechanics
> only phenomenon. 
> 
> historically, the early part of the 20th century saw
> some key
> experiments which brought into question whether we
> could seriously
> consider that something which we thought had a wave
> property now acted
> like a particle, and vice versa. so the either/or
> was gone. actually,
> they seemed to co-exist together in one experimental
> setup. and with
> that came the question: could there be a coherent
> theory that straddled
> both types of properties. 
> 
> and in the 1930's, we got an affirmative answer:
> there was a framework,
> odd as it seemed, that allowed us to see how we
> would detect the
> property "particle" in one setup, and "wave" in
> another. 
> 
> That was Heisenberg. 
> 
> Then Heisenberg asked about the "meaning" of the
> theory. Since the
> structure of physical theory had taken such an
> unexpected turn, he
> focused in on the newest oddity, that properties of
> a thing looked more
> like a pair-wise *operation* than a one dimensional
> scalar *value*: so
> position and speed once sounded like "*three* feet
> away" or "moving *20*
> MPH, whereas now it's more like (very, very
> crudely!!!!) "changed *from*
> three feet away *to* six feet away", or "energy
> jumped *from* three
> calories *to* six calories", and so forth. these
> operations had a
> strangeness when looked at pairwise, and made it
> appear one could not
> ascribe the *pair of properties* position AND speed
> of a given particle
> at any one time. so H went thru some thought
> experiments to show why
> this might be true, and they became dubbed as
> uncertainty relations, 
> 
> historically, because of the way the uncertainty
> relations were first
> presented, there was this interpretation that it was
> the act of
> measuring (observing) that caused the problem.
> whereas the modern view
> is that *pairs* of properties act more oddly than
> any *one* property
> taken in itself. so observer could also be some
> macroscopic measuring
> instrument, not just human consciousness. so thence
> all the
> observer/observed paraphernalia.
> 



		
___________________________________________________________ 
All New Yahoo! Mail  Tired of Vi@gr@! come-ons? Let our SpamGuard protect you. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



PO.MISSOURI.EDU

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager