5 ms·
This is probably the slowest branch of the sciences, not able to get out of labs even after a century. The fundamental problem appears to be that we are trying
by zkmon 1y ago
This is probably the slowest branch of the sciences, not able to get out of labs even after a century. The fundamental problem appears to be that we are trying to control probabilistic nature using concrete real world things. I suspect this is not allowed, at least at an industrial scale. At some point humanity might need to stick what they need instead of what they can.
- mr_mitm 1y agoWhat do you mean? We have been profiting massively from the fruits of QM for the last five decades easily. Transistors, LEDs, Lasers, MRT imaging, solar panels, CCD cameras, etc. have arguably changed the world and would not have been possible without QM. It came out of the lab a long time ago.
- colechristensen 1y agoNot to mention the entire science of chemistry and everything made from it. Quantum mechanics started with the description of electron orbitals around an atom; how they work is the foundation of chemistry.
- kqr 1y agoI think GP was thinking of quantum computers, maybe?
- colechristensen 1y ago[flagged]
- novaomnidev 1y agoThat’s engineering not science
- kgwgk 1y ago>not able to get out of labs even after a century It got out of labs in a quite spectacular way in the summer of 1945, eighty years ago.
- isolli 1y agoThought experiment: did we really need quantum mechanics to build an atom bomb? Couldn't we have built one with a model of the atom based on classical particles (with protons leading to a chain reaction)? Is either the quantized or the uncertainty aspect of QM necessary for this?
- adastra22 1y agoThe very idea of matter and energy being quantized into particles and photons is the starting point of “quantum” mechanics.
- GoblinSlayer 1y agoNucleon orbitals rely a little on Pauli exclusion principle, which you need to add as an ad hoc hypothesis every time in classical physics.
- perihelions 1y agoMost of the science going into the Manhattan Project was experimental measurements and phenomenological models, not fundamental physics at the QM level. There were no usable quantum-mechanical models of nuclear physics at that point. No; they didn't really need it.
- andrepd 1y agoWhat has physics ever done for us? Apart from computers, satellites, planes, communications, sensors, and health... What has physics ever done for us? The roads? Well obviously the roads go without saying!
- the-mitr 1y agoNature is probabilistic. And we know how to calculate those probabilities, that is one of the core ideas of quantum mechanics. Why is it "not allowed"? By whom? Since you are commenting on HN, you are already are using the very mature applications of QM out of laboratory. The proverbial cat (is it Schröedinger's?) is out of the bag!
- GoblinSlayer 1y agoTheory is probabilistic, nature isn't.
- IAmBroom 1y agoNature doesn't obey your opinions.
- GoblinSlayer 1y agoThat's an argument against solipsism at best, not much else.
- nathan_compton 1y agoI don't know dog, that is a pretty bold statement given everything we can presently firmly say about the universe. Like we can imagine some kind of purely deterministic thing going on but when the rubber meets the road the best ways of working stuff out seem to very strongly imply some fundamental indeterminism. No one likes it, but thats the way it is.
- GoblinSlayer 1y agoWhen the rubber meets the road the best ways of working stuff out is to shut up and calculate, you don't figure out anything by assuming unobservable fundamental indeterminism.
- nathan_compton 1y ago
- chermi 1y agoWhat a take. All of modern technology, materials, solid state, semiconductors, transistors... And uhhh did you forget chemistry itself?
- zkmon 1y agoJust came back from work to see all the battering and downvoting. Clam down. I meant Quantum computing using qubits. Apologies for not being specific. Quantum computing itself is also a century old (almost)? Where are we with this? Jeez - HN is brutal. Even a bot could have understood the context I meant.
- wasabi991011 1y agoQuantum computing is very much not a century old