3 ms·

> If quantum mechanics has problems, as we do more experiments, we'll encounter these problems more and more, until eventually they can no longer be overshadow

> If quantum mechanics has problems, as we do more experiments, we'll encounter these problems more and more, until eventually they can no longer be overshadowed. The problem is rather that a lot of physicists tend to "hand-wave away" that existing problems (like "what is a measurement?" and "sudden collapse of the wave function") actually are problems in the theory, i.e. that we don't have "the theory is basically correct (as evidenced by lots of experiments that were done), but these 'problems' are simply open, unanswered research questions".

armchairhacker 2y ago
They're problems when they matter experimentally. If quantum computers are failing because their qubits keep getting measured, the companies building them will spend a lot of money to discover why, which will refine our definition of "measurement" at least in that context.
- aleph_minus_one 2y ago
  > They're problems when they matter experimentally. This is exactly an example of the "hand-waving problems away" point that I made. :-)
  - analog31 2y ago
    They should be hand-waved away. I'm an industrial physicist. I've noticed that physicists, and the general public, often have different ideas about what problems we should be versed in. And people are surprised when they learn that most physicists are not theoreticians. Were it up to the public, we'd all be working on warp drive, infinite energy, and explaining quantum mechanics. ;-) We all learned about the problems in both undergraduate and graduate training, and in discussions and readings. I attended a lecture about it by John Bell. I was excited about it, but I also had an experiment to finish. I think physics is utterly unique in having a theory with seemingly infallible predictive power and zero explanatory power. But if someone asks me about it in the lunch room, all I can do is shrug it off. The fact that this paradox hasn't stopped us dead in our tracks, in 100 years, that's the problem.
    - aleph_minus_one 2y ago
      > I'm an industrial physicist. I've noticed that physicists, and the general public, often have different ideas about what problems we should be versed in. Rather say: you have studied physics, but what you actually work on and are interested in is engineering. :-) Addendum: Just to be very clear: there is nothing wrong with being exciting about engineering problems from industry.
      - analog31 2y ago
        Actually, I'm a scientist, not an engineer. I don't want to be an engineer. I realize we're outnumbered by engineers, and many people have never met a physicist. My parents were both industrial scientists too. We exist. There's a general sense that while there's some overlap, scientists and engineers are not the same, and may even think differently.

armchairhacker 2y ago

They're problems when they matter experimentally. If quantum computers are failing because their qubits keep getting measured, the companies building them will spend a lot of money to discover why, which will refine our definition of "measurement" at least in that context.

aleph_minus_one 2y ago
> They're problems when they matter experimentally. This is exactly an example of the "hand-waving problems away" point that I made. :-)
- analog31 2y ago
  They should be hand-waved away. I'm an industrial physicist. I've noticed that physicists, and the general public, often have different ideas about what problems we should be versed in. And people are surprised when they learn that most physicists are not theoreticians. Were it up to the public, we'd all be working on warp drive, infinite energy, and explaining quantum mechanics. ;-) We all learned about the problems in both undergraduate and graduate training, and in discussions and readings. I attended a lecture about it by John Bell. I was excited about it, but I also had an experiment to finish. I think physics is utterly unique in having a theory with seemingly infallible predictive power and zero explanatory power. But if someone asks me about it in the lunch room, all I can do is shrug it off. The fact that this paradox hasn't stopped us dead in our tracks, in 100 years, that's the problem.
  - aleph_minus_one 2y ago
    > I'm an industrial physicist. I've noticed that physicists, and the general public, often have different ideas about what problems we should be versed in. Rather say: you have studied physics, but what you actually work on and are interested in is engineering. :-) Addendum: Just to be very clear: there is nothing wrong with being exciting about engineering problems from industry.
    - analog31 2y ago
      Actually, I'm a scientist, not an engineer. I don't want to be an engineer. I realize we're outnumbered by engineers, and many people have never met a physicist. My parents were both industrial scientists too. We exist. There's a general sense that while there's some overlap, scientists and engineers are not the same, and may even think differently.