Posted on 12/01/2016 3:16:26 PM PST by Reeses
There’s one interpretation of the meaning of quantum mechanics that manages to skip a lot of the unphysical weirdness of the mainstream interpretations: it's de Broglie-Bohm pilot wave theory.
There are some pretty out-there explanations for the processes at work behind the incredibly successful mathematics of quantum mechanics - things are both waves and particles at the same time, the act of observation defines reality, cats are alive and dead, or even: the universe is constantly splitting into infinite alternate realities. The weird results of quantum experiments seem to demand weird explanations of the nature of reality. In this episode, Matt discusses de Broglie-Bohm pilot wave theory, the one interpretation of quantum mechanics that remains comfortably, stodgily physical.
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
When I see things like “both wave and particle nature at the same time” it nearly makes me cry. The fact of the matter is they aren’t either particles or waves but the same thing appears as both in this dimensional construct. They are dimensional phenomenon. I have been saying it for more than 20 years. I finally got tired of taking the more conventional approach and wrote a novel about a guy who figured it out. See my profile page if you want to read a pretty good fiction story on the subject.
It’s from PBS. That means it’s likely a lie or somehow tied to global warming.
Quantum physics has been off the deep end for a long time. I’ll go with the deterministic explanation.
The most interesting aspect of quantum mechanics to me is the really smooth operation of quantum reels...They handle both waves and particles predictably and with few problems.
I suspect I might agree with you.
I have long been bothered by this very issue, and have begun writing my own science fiction novel that tangentially addresses this.
I will check out your book.
I tend to agree.
If you do read my book, don’t be shy about asking questions. I can talk on that theory for hours and hours.
I need better sources...their explanations really suck. Too little time to claearly establish the main arguments.
You may conclude that my explanations suck too, but they are cogent and consistent. That is worth a look, no?
May have to develop a deterministic strategy after all...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.