3 ms·

How? You can't just keep measuring the position of the particle and keep a list. Recording quantum information entangles the recorder and the system under test

How? You can't just keep measuring the position of the particle and keep a list. Recording quantum information entangles the recorder and the system under test, which affects how interference plays out, which affects the later parts of the path in a way that makes your path-computer not work.

EGreg 9y ago
How? Think a bit harder. It's pretty obvious once you get it. John Titor explained it to me last year. I'm just kidding. Yeah, what you said makes sense. How do we know though that IN PRINCIPLE we can't figure out which QM interprtation is correct? Because we are sure there is no additional data/math that can be developed?
- indolering 9y ago
  I'm pretty sure you are just mistaken in that assertion. There are experiments we could do that would validate it ... but it allows for FTL communications and thus breaks causality. It might be like string theory in that there are extensions which you can't rule out.... Bohmian Mechanics is a pretty garbage theory, it was literally invented as a way to show that the math could be done in a certain way. It's only been of interest to fringe theorists and in pop-science venues because it preserves notions of discrete/continuous space in exchange for violating causality. It might be easier to imagine time-travel than throw away human notions of physical reality, but the universe doesn't care about our puny brains : )
  - EGreg 9y ago
    Right, well I can say the same about your intuition regarding causality and locality. Personally, I never thought that the locality requirement or speed of light limit was an absolute necessity. After all, you get spooky action at a distance either way. In fact, I would submit that avoiding pilot wave theory doesn't rid you of the possibility of non-locality. It might still be the case and now you have even more baggage. Frankly, it's much easier for me to imagine a particle traveling along a pilot wave, and non-local events, then to imagine the world splitting into an infinite number of possibilities at every instance and everything being entangled with everything else in infinite to the third power set of possibilities. By the way, is this an accurate overview? https://youtu.be/rbRVnC92sMs https://youtu.be/rbRVnC92sMs
    - EGreg 9y ago
      Also https://www.quantamagazine.org/pilot-wave-theory-gains-experimental-support-20160516/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/pilot-wave-theory-gains-exper...
    - indolering 9y ago
      > Personally, I never thought that the locality requirement or speed of light limit was an absolute necessity. The only thing weirder than wave/particle dualism is violating causality. > Frankly, it's much easier for me to imagine a particle traveling along a pilot wave, and non-local events... Yup, that's why pilot wave theory is a hot topic in pop-science. You can totally imagine Marty McFly traveling back in time, that doesn't mean it would work. I'm now entering tricky territory as I usually walk through this stuff with an actual physicist, but I don't have one one hand. So with the disclaimer that the following thought experiment is subtly incorrect [0]. We conceptualize things as either continuous or discrete. Take a solid block of matter and across the surface it is continuous. Break the matter in half and you now have two discrete units. If you keep breaking the matter in half, the conceptualization of a continuous/discrete has to break down. So when you get rid of discrete space, is it really that weird when two "particles" seemingly "interact" when separated by ... space? Now trash the idea that time has discrete units and suddenly it's not that weird when particles "interact" across what we perceive to be discrete units of time. The discrete/continuous paradigm is an artificial mental model that we impose based on our sensory inputs. That model is incorrect and you have to replace it with really complex metaphors derived from observing the behavior of these particles in experiments. From all the weird stuff we see in Quantum mechanics, we've never experienced FTL communication ... which is why Pilot Wave theory isn't taken seriously. > then to imagine the world splitting into an infinite number of possibilities at every instance The multiverse theory is a bullshit cop-out. > By the way, is this an accurate overview? https://youtu.be/rbRVnC92sMs https://youtu.be/rbRVnC92sMs Probably not, I stopped when they said that a particle travels all paths simultaneously. That's not correct, a particle does not exist in all places at the same time. 0: I'm pretty sure that the conceptual metaphors above still make use of global hidden variables....

EGreg 9y ago

How? Think a bit harder. It's pretty obvious once you get it. John Titor explained it to me last year. I'm just kidding. Yeah, what you said makes sense. How do we know though that IN PRINCIPLE we can't figure out which QM interprtation is correct? Because we are sure there is no additional data/math that can be developed?

indolering 9y ago
I'm pretty sure you are just mistaken in that assertion. There are experiments we could do that would validate it ... but it allows for FTL communications and thus breaks causality. It might be like string theory in that there are extensions which you can't rule out.... Bohmian Mechanics is a pretty garbage theory, it was literally invented as a way to show that the math could be done in a certain way. It's only been of interest to fringe theorists and in pop-science venues because it preserves notions of discrete/continuous space in exchange for violating causality. It might be easier to imagine time-travel than throw away human notions of physical reality, but the universe doesn't care about our puny brains : )
- EGreg 9y ago
  Right, well I can say the same about your intuition regarding causality and locality. Personally, I never thought that the locality requirement or speed of light limit was an absolute necessity. After all, you get spooky action at a distance either way. In fact, I would submit that avoiding pilot wave theory doesn't rid you of the possibility of non-locality. It might still be the case and now you have even more baggage. Frankly, it's much easier for me to imagine a particle traveling along a pilot wave, and non-local events, then to imagine the world splitting into an infinite number of possibilities at every instance and everything being entangled with everything else in infinite to the third power set of possibilities. By the way, is this an accurate overview? https://youtu.be/rbRVnC92sMs https://youtu.be/rbRVnC92sMs
  - EGreg 9y ago
    Also https://www.quantamagazine.org/pilot-wave-theory-gains-experimental-support-20160516/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/pilot-wave-theory-gains-exper...
  - indolering 9y ago
    > Personally, I never thought that the locality requirement or speed of light limit was an absolute necessity. The only thing weirder than wave/particle dualism is violating causality. > Frankly, it's much easier for me to imagine a particle traveling along a pilot wave, and non-local events... Yup, that's why pilot wave theory is a hot topic in pop-science. You can totally imagine Marty McFly traveling back in time, that doesn't mean it would work. I'm now entering tricky territory as I usually walk through this stuff with an actual physicist, but I don't have one one hand. So with the disclaimer that the following thought experiment is subtly incorrect [0]. We conceptualize things as either continuous or discrete. Take a solid block of matter and across the surface it is continuous. Break the matter in half and you now have two discrete units. If you keep breaking the matter in half, the conceptualization of a continuous/discrete has to break down. So when you get rid of discrete space, is it really that weird when two "particles" seemingly "interact" when separated by ... space? Now trash the idea that time has discrete units and suddenly it's not that weird when particles "interact" across what we perceive to be discrete units of time. The discrete/continuous paradigm is an artificial mental model that we impose based on our sensory inputs. That model is incorrect and you have to replace it with really complex metaphors derived from observing the behavior of these particles in experiments. From all the weird stuff we see in Quantum mechanics, we've never experienced FTL communication ... which is why Pilot Wave theory isn't taken seriously. > then to imagine the world splitting into an infinite number of possibilities at every instance The multiverse theory is a bullshit cop-out. > By the way, is this an accurate overview? https://youtu.be/rbRVnC92sMs https://youtu.be/rbRVnC92sMs Probably not, I stopped when they said that a particle travels all paths simultaneously. That's not correct, a particle does not exist in all places at the same time. 0: I'm pretty sure that the conceptual metaphors above still make use of global hidden variables....