Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the blogger are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

alex smith: on 8/21/17 at 10:30am UTC, wrote Nice Blog and Great article…its always working for me well…Keep going !...

Steve Agnew: on 8/17/17 at 3:48am UTC, wrote The question is very simple...does a bit of noise come from a single source...

Georgina Woodward: on 8/16/17 at 5:14am UTC, wrote The point I was trying to make Steve, is that the cut off in know-ability...

Steve Agnew: on 8/16/17 at 4:13am UTC, wrote I am not completely certain why this topic is of such interest. Of course...

Georgina Woodward: on 8/15/17 at 21:21pm UTC, wrote Steve, I think you are thinking about the uncertainty of both position and...

Robert McEachern: on 8/15/17 at 12:21pm UTC, wrote "classically, all knowledge is knowable" Classically, knowledge is that...

Steve Agnew: on 8/15/17 at 4:30am UTC, wrote Look...I love it that there is so much interest in knowledge...I am a...

Robert McEachern: on 8/14/17 at 17:28pm UTC, wrote Steve said "Somehow I don't think that will solve anything... " It would...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Lorraine Ford: "Tom, Re "What makes you think I can't, Lorraine?": Because that would be..." in Wandering Towards a Goal:...

Jonathan Dickau: "I left out the best part... Of course; if I knew how to tell a joke I'd..." in Wandering Towards a Goal:...

John Cox: ""No phishing intrusions take place..." - Joe Fisher, Realist!?!" in Sounding the Drums to...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Anonymous, You may not have noticed that Professor Scott Aaronson and..." in Sounding the Drums to...

mcafee support: "we are providing best service to our McAfee users for any query related to..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Aol support: "Our AOL customer support team is available 24/7 so you don’t have to..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

outlook support: "When ever you face any problem with your outlook email account then you..." in Bohemian Reality:...

smith jina: "awesome post, thank you. Epson Help Epson Support Epson Support Number ..." in What Happens Inside the...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Sounding the Drums to Listen for Gravity’s Effect on Quantum Phenomena
A bench-top experiment could test the notion that gravity breaks delicate quantum superpositions.

Watching the Observers
Accounting for quantum fuzziness could help us measure space and time—and the cosmos—more accurately.

Bohemian Reality: Searching for a Quantum Connection to Consciousness
Is there are sweet spot where artificial intelligence systems could have the maximum amount of consciousness while retaining powerful quantum properties?

Quantum Replicants: Should future androids dream of quantum sheep?
To build the ultimate artificial mimics of real life systems, we may need to use quantum memory.

Painting a QBist Picture of Reality
A radical interpretation of physics makes quantum theory more personal.


FQXi BLOGS
August 24, 2017

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: Schrödinger’s Cat Meowing Between Many Worlds and Collapse Models [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Blogger Catalina Curceanu wrote on Jul. 28, 2017 @ 16:59 GMT
This post is co-written by FQXi members Catalina Curceanu (LNF-INFN, Italy) and Angelo Bassi (Univ. of Trieste and INFN, Italy):

In May, we organised an FQXi-sponsored workshop dedicated to Quantum Foundations at the Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, LNF-INFN, in Italy, on "'Events' as we see them: experimental test of the collapse models as a solution of the measurement...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Robert H McEachern wrote on Jul. 28, 2017 @ 18:53 GMT
There is nothing peculiar about Schrödinger's cat and Bell Inequality tests, other than the mystery of why the physics community has taken so long to see the obvious.

To start with, consider three types of classical objects, a pair of balls (white and black) a pair of gloves (right and left handed) and a pair of coins. If one of the balls, gloves and coins is given to Alice and the other,...

view entire post


attachments: One_Time_Pad_Coins.jpeg

this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate


Steve Agnew wrote on Aug. 5, 2017 @ 19:52 GMT
This conference was very interesting and very topical. Phase decay is a well known part of our quantum universe and it is a natural consequence to use phase decay to limit measurement and entanglement.

This makes gravity different from charge because gravity does not depend on phase while charge does. Continuous spontaneous localization is the latest method science uses to collapse wavefunctions and make sense out of reality. Since coins and other macro objects do not show phase coherence, it is hard to make macro determinate sense from quantum effects.

One thing that is still true is that very smart people continue to argue about the nature of physical reality. Determinists argue for a reality without phase with certain futures without free choice while quantavanglists argue for uncertain futures with free choice.

Now the challenge is to explain how space and time emerge from a simpler reality of matter and action...

report post as inappropriate

Robert H McEachern replied on Aug. 5, 2017 @ 21:17 GMT
"it is hard to make macro determinate sense from quantum effects." Only because few people have ever looked in the right places. David Bohm had figured much of it out, in his 1951 book "Quantum Theory." For example, he demonstrated that a particle would scatter off any potential with a sharp edge (like that produced by a slit) in a way that would produce a rippled, scattering cross-section (AKA interference pattern). However, being unfamiliar with newly developed Information Theory, he had not been able to figure out why quantum scattering by a field, seems to only happen at discrete points, rather than as a continuous trajectory, like a planet in a classical, gravitational field. But the quantized nature of the information, associated with the scattered particles, provides an answer to that question.

Here are some related thoughts about this

Rob McEachern

report post as inappropriate

Steve Agnew replied on Aug. 6, 2017 @ 16:52 GMT
You have certainly put a lot of time and effort into this and the DeBroglie-Bohm equation is one way to determine quantum phase by supposing there are hidden variables and pilot waves. There are many very smart people who agree with you but there are many more who disagree.

You do not mention that continuous spontaneous localization (CSL) is yet another way to make wavefunctions collapse and therefore determinate, but still preserve quantum uncertainty. The CSL introduces a quantum noise function that kicks in at some distance from an atom with some very low probability as well.

The CSL seems to be equivalent to the gravitational fluctuations expected due to the motions of atomic charges. Even though such quantum phase fluctuations have not yet been measured, they will be as soon as science gets a few more orders of magnitude of sensitivity. Apparently the LISA Pathfinder noise measurement at L1 still needed a couple of more orders of magnitude of sensitivity to show the CSL effect.

In fact, science has measured CSL quantum phase decay noise, but the chaos of classical Shannon noise so far precludes an unambiguous interpretation. The indeterminate and uncertain quantum phase noise is a part of our universe just as is the determinate Shannon noise of classical chaos.

That fact that very smart people argue about the nature of noise is actually due to the inability of current science to measure quantum phase noise in the background of the classical noise of chaos...but science is getting closer to the truth...

report post as inappropriate

Robert H McEachern replied on Aug. 6, 2017 @ 18:13 GMT
"The CSL introduces a quantum noise function that kicks in at some distance from an atom with some very low probability as well."

Classically, noise is intrinsic to the very definition of observable information. So there is no need for it to "kick in". It is always present, intrinsic to the entities being observed, because:

Nature does not know how to manufacture truly identical particles. Consequently, the differences between otherwise identical particles, manifest themselves as classical noise, which in turn manifests itself, as the so-called quantum correlations.

Rob McEachern

report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.