Quantum theory is wrong.

A word in your ear ^ | March 7th 2013 | Mark

[mnehring]

It looks like the blog author forgot to put down his equations and controlled experiments that prove his point.

[Da Coyote]

Indeed, the words of the Copenhagen group are hard to understand. But - the math is not. And the math works...to better than one part in literally billions.

So, please back up your “interpretations” with math.

Words alone are worth about as much as emanations of your typical politician.

[Bobalu]

He’s an idiot.

See Wheeler’s delayed choice experiment.

Quantum mechanics is very strange but has been confirmed in many experiments.

[Heartlander]

F > P

[ZX12R]

For someone making such a claim, he didn’t really say much, or go into much detail.

[count-your-change]

Observation does change the thing being observed. Put a camera on a crowd snd see how many start saying , “Hi Mom!”, even if Mom has been gone for years. And a camera will convince many they actually have enough talent to perform against the obvious proof they do not.

The math: Camera + Idiots = Buffoonery (C+I=B>)

[mnehring]

Let's start with the basics, what mathematical errors has the author found with the Schrodinger's Equation?

After the author can explain this, we can get into the real difficult stuff.

[I want the USA back]

Too short, not enough information, but essentially right.

[Fighting Irish]

[ZX12R]

I’m still holding out for a “hidden variables” type of explanation, to understand the oddities of quantum behavior.

[mosaicwolf]

I say nothing is real. Everything is an illusion; a projection of the mind. (Read: Ego) Math to back it up? Don’t need that pesky mathematics when one knows. :-)

[Pecos]

His "out" is that he says it would take instruments far in advanced of today's technology to be able to prove his point - which means he cannot, or at least has not, been able to prove his point mathematically. The essence of his problem may lie in his own self-contradictory statements, to wit,

"It is not that the act of observation that alters reality. In fact the physical nature of the "observation" small though it may be is sufficient to alter the metrics of sub atomic particles."

If someone can point out the practical difference between a physical act of observation and the fact that an observation has physical impact, I would appreciate it.

[KarlInOhio]

That cat just agrees because he's scheduled to be the next one in the box to test quantum superposition.

[ZX12R]

I say nothing is real.

In a way, that is essentially what the copenhagen interpretation says. That there is no deep reality, at least not one that human beings could understand. Everything exists on a cloud of potentials, which is not a real thing.

[mnehring]

[pgkdan]

I don’t know anything about Schrdinger’s equation...but thatnks to Sheldon and Penny I do know about Schrodinger’s cat!

[MotorCityBuck]

Lol!

[Rebel_Ace]

"It is not that the act of observation that alters reality. In fact the physical nature of the "observation" small though it may be is sufficient to alter the metrics of sub atomic particles."

"...If someone can point out the practical difference between a physical act of observation and the fact that an observation has physical impact, I would appreciate it..."

Here is what I think he is trying to "split hairs" about if you will. Let's say I want to look at something with my eyes. Well, I am going to have to bounce a photon off it, so it can reflect into my eye. That is the "physical act".

Now, what I think he is trying to get at is the "metaphysical" aspect of "understanding" the observation.

It really is just the old "If a tree falls in the forest, and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" kind of thing.

I am NOT supporting his position, just trying to make sense of it. I am really more of an experiment and math guy.

[dirtboy]