5 ms·

> They're manifestations of fields. Or wave. Everything is a quantum wave. https://www.vlatkovedral.com/everything-in-the-universe-is-a-quantum-wave/ https://

by Noaidi 4mo ago

> They're manifestations of fields. Or wave. Everything is a quantum wave. https://www.vlatkovedral.com/everything-in-the-universe-is-a-quantum-wave/ https://www.vlatkovedral.com/everything-in-the-universe-is-a...

GroksBarnacles 4mo ago
A wave is already what we call a manifestation of a field, maybe I skimmed too quickly but I don't get the author's breakthrough point.
- Noaidi 4mo ago
  Yes, the field is the substrate. "I insist upon the view that 'all is waves'." Letter to John Lighton Synge (9 November 1959), as quoted by Walter Moore in Schrödinger: Life and Thought (1989) ISBN 0521437679 It is not a breakthrough, it is just something we refuse to see, something that was known for a century. "All is a wave" is the unifying principle. I am no mathematician, but the math needs to start with that fundamental principle. The very notion of calling it "qunatum" physics is probably wrong since quantum is "a discrete quantity of energy proportional in magnitude to the frequency of the radiation it represents." And if everything is a wave there are no discrete quantities beyond our definition of what constitutes the end, or borders, of the wave.
  - dpark 4mo ago
    > I am no mathematician, but the math needs to start with that fundamental principle. This is a weird sort of hubris. “I’m not qualified to do this job but I can certainly tell you how it needs to be done.” > And if everything is a wave there are no discrete quantities beyond our definition of what constitutes the end, or borders, of the wave. This is not true in multiple ways. First, it’s known that these particles exhibit quantum behavior. This is measured and confirmed over and over. Many measures are in fact quantized. Second, existing as a wave does not mean no discrete quantities. Even in everyday materials we observe situations like standing waves that are effectively quantized. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_wave https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_wave
    - Noaidi 4mo ago
      > This is a weird sort of hubris. “I’m not qualified to do this job but I can certainly tell you how it needs to be done.” A quantum state is a mathematical entity that represents a physical system. Since waves are not physical can you see where I can assume that the math needs to start from a different place? If it is even useful at all? > it’s known that these particles exhibit quantum behavior. Many measures are in fact quantized. To measure is to quantize, so this is circular reasoning. If particles are always waves we would still see the quantum behavior. > Second, existing as a wave does not mean no discrete quantities. Where is the precise point a standing wave ends and begins? The best we can do is guess with calculus and differential equations. Again, yoiu are quantifying things that in and of themselves are not quantized outside of our conception.
      - tsimionescu 4mo ago
        > To measure is to quantize, so this is circular reasoning. This is a fundamental misunderstanding. Measurement (which is a precisely defined mathematical concept) is not the same thing as quantization. For a very basic example, in all known physics theories, including QFT, SR, and GR, space and time can be measured, and they are not quantized. In fact, there is no theory compatible with SR in which space and time can be quantized, given the nature of the Lorenz transform: SR predicts continuous length contraction from the PoV of observers moving at any velocity relative to each other; for any distance of length 1, some other observer can exist for which the length would be 1/x, with x as a real number.
        Noaidi 4mo ago
        > space and time can be measured, and they are not quantized. Yet… Because we do not have the formulas does not mean they are not quantized. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-time-quantized-in-othe/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-time-quantized...
        tsimionescu 4mo ago
        Again, our current theories all agree that space and time are continuous, not quantized. Quantized space or time are not consistent with either QFT or GR. Now, we do know that QFT and GR are not consistent with each other, so at least one new theory is necessary, at least one of them must be wrong. So the new theory could involve quantized space or time - but it could very well not. We don't know at the moment, and all we know is that our best theories, limited as they may be, require continuous space and time (and other quantities).
  - solid_fuel 4mo ago
    > It is not a breakthrough, it is just something we refuse to see, something that was known for a century. This sounds like you're about to try selling me a crystal and a magic ritual. The wording here is far too grandiose, and I assure you physicists are not "refusing to see" that "everything is a wave". Whatever you imagine that might mean. > The very notion of calling it "qunatum" physics is probably wrong since quantum is "a discrete quantity of energy proportional in magnitude to the frequency of the radiation it represents." > And if everything is a wave there are no discrete quantities beyond our definition of what constitutes the end, or borders, of the wave. Mumbo-jumbo. It's called "quantum" physics because of the discovery that many parts of nature do indeed exist in discrete steps. Yes, electron orbitals are described with wave functions - that is, the electron exists as a probability cloud, but the functions themselves are still discrete! When an electron gains energy, it jumps from one orbital to another without passing through a continuous state in the middle. That is the fundamental insight of Quantum Mechanics - energy, momentum, etc are all quantized and not actually continuous. The wikipedia article on quantum mechanics literally covers this in the intro - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics
    - Noaidi 4mo ago
      Isn’t the wave function only discrete when we measure it? The field is the continuous state so nothing has to jump through anything. For example the hydrogen wave function does not tell us where the electron will be located, only where most likely will be located. What is discrete about that?
      - solid_fuel 4mo ago
        > Isn’t the wave function only discrete when we measure it? No. > The field is the continuous state so nothing has to jump through anything. No. > For example the hydrogen wave function does not tell us where the electron will be located, only where most likely will be located. What is discrete about that? Read what I wrote again. The wave function itself is continuous but the jump between states (aka between wave functions) is discrete. This is because energy is quantized and does not exist in continuous quantities. The transfer of energy in quantum systems is therefore discrete, which is the whole reason it is called quantum mechanics.
- dpark 4mo ago
  I am not sure there’s any breakthrough here, but this article is about a different QM interpretation (as opposed to Copenhagen or Many Worlds). Interesting but seems irrelevant to the discussion here of particles and fields.
antonvs 4mo ago
A wave is a phenomenon that propagates through a field - i.e. the field is what allows the wave to exist. (The philosophy of that admittedly gets messy, though, e.g. "are fields real objects?")
- Noaidi 4mo ago
  Yes, very messy and ultimately unknowable.
  - antonvs 4mo ago
    Sure. We can say the same thing about a "quantum wave", though.
    - Noaidi 4mo ago
      Yes. This is why Physicists will reject the "everything is a wave theory" till the bitter end. They become frustrated when faced with the un-measurable. There is no "quantum wave", there are only waves. Immeasurable, undefinable waves.
      - antonvs 4mo ago
        > There is no "quantum wave" Earlier you wrote, "Everything is a quantum wave." You also linked to an article titled, "The Everything-Is-a-Quantum-Wave Interpretation of Quantum Physics." You seem to be contradicting yourself.
        Noaidi 4mo ago
        Yeah, I can see how it looks that way. I did not say everything is the quantum wave. I said everything is a wave, but the research paper i linked to uses the sloppy term Everything is a quantum wave. While I agree with the author I disagree with the title and terminology
        4mo ago
andrewflnr 4mo ago
> Now, when I told my editor at Allen Lane about my own interpretation, he immediately said “It’s Many Worlds on steroids!” There is a grain of truth in that, ... Dude, this is an answer to an entirely different question. He's proposing an interpretation of QM, which is independent from "how many fundamental particles".

by Noaidi 4mo ago

GroksBarnacles 4mo ago

A wave is already what we call a manifestation of a field, maybe I skimmed too quickly but I don't get the author's breakthrough point.

Noaidi 4mo ago
Yes, the field is the substrate. "I insist upon the view that 'all is waves'." Letter to John Lighton Synge (9 November 1959), as quoted by Walter Moore in Schrödinger: Life and Thought (1989) ISBN 0521437679 It is not a breakthrough, it is just something we refuse to see, something that was known for a century. "All is a wave" is the unifying principle. I am no mathematician, but the math needs to start with that fundamental principle. The very notion of calling it "qunatum" physics is probably wrong since quantum is "a discrete quantity of energy proportional in magnitude to the frequency of the radiation it represents." And if everything is a wave there are no discrete quantities beyond our definition of what constitutes the end, or borders, of the wave.
- dpark 4mo ago
  > I am no mathematician, but the math needs to start with that fundamental principle. This is a weird sort of hubris. “I’m not qualified to do this job but I can certainly tell you how it needs to be done.” > And if everything is a wave there are no discrete quantities beyond our definition of what constitutes the end, or borders, of the wave. This is not true in multiple ways. First, it’s known that these particles exhibit quantum behavior. This is measured and confirmed over and over. Many measures are in fact quantized. Second, existing as a wave does not mean no discrete quantities. Even in everyday materials we observe situations like standing waves that are effectively quantized. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_wave https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_wave
  - Noaidi 4mo ago
    > This is a weird sort of hubris. “I’m not qualified to do this job but I can certainly tell you how it needs to be done.” A quantum state is a mathematical entity that represents a physical system. Since waves are not physical can you see where I can assume that the math needs to start from a different place? If it is even useful at all? > it’s known that these particles exhibit quantum behavior. Many measures are in fact quantized. To measure is to quantize, so this is circular reasoning. If particles are always waves we would still see the quantum behavior. > Second, existing as a wave does not mean no discrete quantities. Where is the precise point a standing wave ends and begins? The best we can do is guess with calculus and differential equations. Again, yoiu are quantifying things that in and of themselves are not quantized outside of our conception.
    - tsimionescu 4mo ago
      > To measure is to quantize, so this is circular reasoning. This is a fundamental misunderstanding. Measurement (which is a precisely defined mathematical concept) is not the same thing as quantization. For a very basic example, in all known physics theories, including QFT, SR, and GR, space and time can be measured, and they are not quantized. In fact, there is no theory compatible with SR in which space and time can be quantized, given the nature of the Lorenz transform: SR predicts continuous length contraction from the PoV of observers moving at any velocity relative to each other; for any distance of length 1, some other observer can exist for which the length would be 1/x, with x as a real number.
      - Noaidi 4mo ago
        > space and time can be measured, and they are not quantized. Yet… Because we do not have the formulas does not mean they are not quantized. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-time-quantized-in-othe/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-time-quantized...
        tsimionescu 4mo ago
        Again, our current theories all agree that space and time are continuous, not quantized. Quantized space or time are not consistent with either QFT or GR. Now, we do know that QFT and GR are not consistent with each other, so at least one new theory is necessary, at least one of them must be wrong. So the new theory could involve quantized space or time - but it could very well not. We don't know at the moment, and all we know is that our best theories, limited as they may be, require continuous space and time (and other quantities).
- solid_fuel 4mo ago
  > It is not a breakthrough, it is just something we refuse to see, something that was known for a century. This sounds like you're about to try selling me a crystal and a magic ritual. The wording here is far too grandiose, and I assure you physicists are not "refusing to see" that "everything is a wave". Whatever you imagine that might mean. > The very notion of calling it "qunatum" physics is probably wrong since quantum is "a discrete quantity of energy proportional in magnitude to the frequency of the radiation it represents." > And if everything is a wave there are no discrete quantities beyond our definition of what constitutes the end, or borders, of the wave. Mumbo-jumbo. It's called "quantum" physics because of the discovery that many parts of nature do indeed exist in discrete steps. Yes, electron orbitals are described with wave functions - that is, the electron exists as a probability cloud, but the functions themselves are still discrete! When an electron gains energy, it jumps from one orbital to another without passing through a continuous state in the middle. That is the fundamental insight of Quantum Mechanics - energy, momentum, etc are all quantized and not actually continuous. The wikipedia article on quantum mechanics literally covers this in the intro - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics
  - Noaidi 4mo ago
    Isn’t the wave function only discrete when we measure it? The field is the continuous state so nothing has to jump through anything. For example the hydrogen wave function does not tell us where the electron will be located, only where most likely will be located. What is discrete about that?
    - solid_fuel 4mo ago
      > Isn’t the wave function only discrete when we measure it? No. > The field is the continuous state so nothing has to jump through anything. No. > For example the hydrogen wave function does not tell us where the electron will be located, only where most likely will be located. What is discrete about that? Read what I wrote again. The wave function itself is continuous but the jump between states (aka between wave functions) is discrete. This is because energy is quantized and does not exist in continuous quantities. The transfer of energy in quantum systems is therefore discrete, which is the whole reason it is called quantum mechanics.
dpark 4mo ago
I am not sure there’s any breakthrough here, but this article is about a different QM interpretation (as opposed to Copenhagen or Many Worlds). Interesting but seems irrelevant to the discussion here of particles and fields.

antonvs 4mo ago

A wave is a phenomenon that propagates through a field - i.e. the field is what allows the wave to exist. (The philosophy of that admittedly gets messy, though, e.g. "are fields real objects?")

Noaidi 4mo ago
Yes, very messy and ultimately unknowable.
- antonvs 4mo ago
  Sure. We can say the same thing about a "quantum wave", though.
  - Noaidi 4mo ago
    Yes. This is why Physicists will reject the "everything is a wave theory" till the bitter end. They become frustrated when faced with the un-measurable. There is no "quantum wave", there are only waves. Immeasurable, undefinable waves.
    - antonvs 4mo ago
      > There is no "quantum wave" Earlier you wrote, "Everything is a quantum wave." You also linked to an article titled, "The Everything-Is-a-Quantum-Wave Interpretation of Quantum Physics." You seem to be contradicting yourself.
      - Noaidi 4mo ago
        Yeah, I can see how it looks that way. I did not say everything is the quantum wave. I said everything is a wave, but the research paper i linked to uses the sloppy term Everything is a quantum wave. While I agree with the author I disagree with the title and terminology
        4mo ago

andrewflnr 4mo ago

> Now, when I told my editor at Allen Lane about my own interpretation, he immediately said “It’s Many Worlds on steroids!” There is a grain of truth in that, ... Dude, this is an answer to an entirely different question. He's proposing an interpretation of QM, which is independent from "how many fundamental particles".