4 ms·
Isn‘t it strange that all these aspects of non-relativistic quantum mechanics are always tested experimentally using photons, entities which are inherently rela
by amai 4y ago
Isn‘t it strange that all these aspects of non-relativistic quantum mechanics are always tested experimentally using photons, entities which are inherently relativistic?
- Kranar 4y agoQuantum mechanics is perfectly compatible with special relativity (quantum electrodynamics). It's general relativity, or rather a quantum theory of gravity, that lacks a complete solution.
- amai 4y agoThe Schrödinger equation is not Lorentz invariant, so standard quantum mechanics is not compatible with relativity. Bells equations and all those stuff is all based on non-relativistic QM. It is true that we have quantum electrodynamics as a relativistic version of QM. However in QED the number of particles are not fixed and a wave function can therefore not be defined. What I'm criticizing is that most papers on Bells equations, contextuality, popescu-rohrlich boxes, spooky action on a distance, collapse of the wave function, decoherence simply ignore that QED exists and relativistic effects might play a role in describing the seemingly "magic" effects of QM.
- macrolocal 4y agoObjective collapse interpretations create a false sense of non-relativistic behavior when there really isn't any. Only the correlations are non-local, and those get set up in advance.
- n4r9 4y agoI would say no, because the experiments are effectively independent of the mass and speed of the photons, and tend to focus on correlations between logical yes/no outcomes.
- TheOtherHobbes 4y agoPhotons happen to be convenient, but they work just as well with electrons or any other particle.
- arrow7000 4y agoWhat's strange about that? It sounds like you're implying something but I don't know what