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.

Contests Home

Current Essay Contest


Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation

Previous Contests

Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest
December 24, 2019 - April 24, 2020
Contest Partners: Fetzer Franklin Fund, and The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.
read/discusswinners

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author 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

Daniel Sudarsky: on 5/22/20 at 2:06am UTC, wrote Dear Antoine, Thanks you very much for your kind and thoughtful reply. ...

Antoine Tilloy: on 5/18/20 at 12:33pm UTC, wrote Dear Daniel, Thank you very much for your thoughtful comment on my essay,...

Peter Jackson: on 5/16/20 at 19:22pm UTC, wrote Antoine, Fascinating approach, beautifully presented, but perhaps you...

Daniel Sudarsky: on 5/16/20 at 18:27pm UTC, wrote Dear Antoine, I very much enjoyed your essay (as I have previously...

James Arnold: on 5/16/20 at 6:46am UTC, wrote It is unfortunate that the equation describing the probability of an event...

Jochen Szangolies: on 5/15/20 at 16:11pm UTC, wrote Dear Antoine, happily, I stumbled across your essay before the close of...

Pavel Poluian: on 5/15/20 at 11:09am UTC, wrote Dear Antoine Tilloy! Your article refers to real fundamental issues. It's...

David Jewson: on 5/8/20 at 8:31am UTC, wrote Dear Antoine, I have had a most enjoyable morning thinking about your...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

jim hughes: "I'm not a mathematician. So what I see here is some smart people who..." in Consciousness and the...

Steve Dufourny: "Hello FQXi, the members and all, I try to do my best to unite and convice..." in Global Collaboration

Lorraine Ford: "The idea of a smooth mathematical evolution of “the wave function”, and..." in Consciousness and the...

Georgina Woodward: "Broken machine: What do[es] I see next? The I that was, E.I, has not been..." in The Room in the Elephant:...

Lorraine Ford: "Hi Stefan, I hope that a good leader, and a good political party, is..." in The Present State of...

Lorraine Ford: "We live in an age of computing. But physics, mathematics and philosophy,..." in The Present State of...

Georgina Woodward: "I've copied the comment to the thread where it belongs. This orphan can be..." in The Room in the Elephant:...

Georgina Woodward: "Thank you John. What did you think about the questioning whether altitude..." in The Nature of Time


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Good Vibrations
Microbead 'motor' exploits natural fluctuations for power.

Reconstructing Physics
New photon experiment gives new meta-framework, 'constructor theory,' a boost.

The Quantum Engineer: Q&A with Alexia Auffèves
Experiments seek to use quantum observations as fuel to power mini motors.

The Quantum Clock-Maker Investigating COVID-19, Causality, and the Trouble with AI
Sally Shrapnel, a quantum physicist and medical practitioner, on her experiments into cause-and-effect that could help us understand time’s arrow—and build better healthcare algorithms.

Connect the Quantum Dots for a New Kind of Fuel
'Artificial atoms' allow physicists to manipulate individual electrons—and could help to reduce energy wastage in electronic devices.


FQXi FORUM
September 28, 2021

CATEGORY: Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest (2019-2020) [back]
TOPIC: The subtle sound of quantum jumps by Antoine Tilloy [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Antoine Tilloy Tilloy wrote on Mar. 23, 2020 @ 01:11 GMT
Essay Abstract

A non-trivial example of empirical undecidability -- Could we hear the pop of a wave-function collapse, and if so, what would it sound like? There exist reconstructions or modifications of quantum mechanics (collapse models) where this archetypal signature of randomness exists and can in principle be witnessed. But, perhaps surprisingly, the resulting sound is disappointingly banal, indistinguishable from any other click. The problem of finding the right description of the world between two completely different classes of models -- where wave functions jump and where they do not -- is empirically undecidable. Behind this seemingly trivial observation lie deep lessons about the rigidity of quantum mechanics, the difficulty to blame unpredictability on intrinsic randomness, and more generally the physical limitations to our knowledge of reality.

Author Bio

Postdoctoral researcher in the Theory Division of the Max Planck Institute of Quantum Optics (Garching, Germany)

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share


Shawn Halayka wrote on Mar. 23, 2020 @ 03:04 GMT
Dear Antoine,

Speaking of collapse...

What do you call it when a system goes from randomly placed particles to uniformly placed particles?

The spectrum of the edge lengths for randomly placed particles collapses when the particles become uniformly placed.

https://vixra.org/abs/2003.0385

Do you know: does this have anything to do with quantum physics?

- Shawn

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Martin van Staveren wrote on Mar. 23, 2020 @ 11:08 GMT
Why should the wave function be a physical object?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


David Brown wrote on Mar. 23, 2020 @ 15:05 GMT
"... without a simple probabilistic rule, extracting predictions from a theory far more massively non-local than quantum mechanics becomes a daunting if not impossible task. Gisin’s no-go for non-linear modifications is powerful, and although not fully airtight (no-go theorems rarely are), it has not been convincingly bypassed yet." Do you think that "spacetime is doomed" as some string theorists conjecture?

Gisin's theorem concerns "... the possibility to complement quantum physics with nonlocal variables ..."

"On the impossibility of covariant nonlocal "hidden" variables in quantum physics" by Nicolas Gisin, 2011, arXiv

What precisely is a "variable"? I have suggested that string theory with the finite nature hypothesis has 2 decisive tests: (1) Riofrio-Sanejouand cosmological model (away from the Koide and Lestone cutoffs) and (2) dark-matter-compensation-constant = (3.9±.5) * 10^–5 ... I suggest that the Gravity Probe B science team is wrong and I am correct about the 4 ultra-precise gyroscopes. Let us suppose that, near the Planck scale, the concepts of time, space, energy, and quantum information fail and need to be somehow replaced ... in that case, it seems to me that Gisin's arguments concerning "covariant nonlocal variables" might be irrelevant near the Planck scale. Consider 2 questions: Does Milgrom's MOND have empirical successes that require a revision of the foundations of physics? Is Lestone's theory of virtual cross sections basically wrong?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate
Dale Carl Gillman replied on Mar. 24, 2020 @ 06:42 GMT
Hi Dr. Brown,

Personally, I am uncomfortable commenting on MOND as I'm not an astrophysicist. I would like to know why, according to Gisin "'..."covariant nonlocal variables" might be irrelevant near the Planck scale...'". I will send you an email within the next day or so.

Thank you,

Dale C. Gillman

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Mar. 26, 2020 @ 14:55 GMT
Dear Antoine,

While reading your essay I made the following remarks:

“In Bohmian mechanics, the reality is made of particles which flow along a natural probability current built from the wave function” quite right, I can almost agree with that. But is it still Bohmian thinking when you decide to name the particles “emergent phenomena” and declaring that the probability...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Mar. 29, 2020 @ 08:37 GMT
Dear Prof Antoine Tilloy

Thank you for an excellent essay

I did not do much work in Wave function collapse, Mostly it was in Cosmology and Astrophysics

Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability are very much undesirable properties and out-comes of any theory. That theory might have developed by a very reputed person or by a group of well-educated and knowledgeable persons. There is no point of poring resources, money and highly educated man power into that theory when that theory is failing on above three points.

I just elaborated what should be the freedom available to an author when the “ real open thinking” is supported. Have a look at my essay please.

“A properly deciding, Computing and Predicting new theory’s Philosophy”

=snp.gupta

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Israel Perez wrote on Apr. 9, 2020 @ 21:17 GMT
Dear Antoine

Thanks for your nice essay which was very illuminating for me. I see that despite many years of research, many people are still concerned about the measurement problem. I also notice that nobody has taken into consideration in their models how much the scale of the system under study is affected by the measurement. In my experience macroscopic systems inherit quantum effects although they are not influenced by the measuring process and thus behave as classical systems

I just have a question. Are you aware of stochastic electrodynamics theory?

Best Regards

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate
Author Antoine Tilloy Tilloy replied on Apr. 14, 2020 @ 07:34 GMT
Dear Isreal,

Thanks for your comment. I think that the scale of the system under study as you say is rather crucial to understand the concept of measurement in any reasonable reconstruction of quantum mechanics. However, I think it is a rather standard belief in the foundations community, and not something nobody takes into consideration. All the models that I know use decoherence (hence a large system effect) to explain measurement at some point. In these accounts, decoherence itself is not sufficient, but it is necessary to make things work properly. As I argued in this essay, even for collapse models, decoherence plays an important role in the emergence of classicality.

As for SED, I am aware of it, and have worked on relativistic collapse models that bear similarities with it. But I never got into the details of the original formulations, and at least when it is explained at the layman level (SED is just ED with a stochastic EM field), it seems unclear how genuine quantum non-locality could emerge.

Best regards,

Antoine

Bookmark and Share

Israel Perez replied on Apr. 16, 2020 @ 06:10 GMT
Sounds great, thanks for your reply. I appreciate it. Good luck in the contest!

Israel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


David Jewson wrote on May. 8, 2020 @ 08:31 GMT
Dear Antoine,

I have had a most enjoyable morning thinking about your essay. What made me really interested is that I believe I may have discovered one of those alternative interpretations of the maths of Quantum Theory that you describe. But, I realized, reading your essay, it is different to the others in that it is neither a model with wave function collapse or a model without – it is a strange mutant somewhere in between.

So, it describes particles that make lots of little jumps, which is the hallmark of wavefunction collapse, but achieves this by the constant creation of new wave functions without having to collapse the old ones.

These jumps are probabilistic, and this jumping behaviour is a key part of determining the behaviour of the particle, so the jumping behaviour makes lots of predictions that can be tested.

This is all done using the conventional maths of Quantum Theory but instead of starting by thinking about the behaviour of the electron (a rather complicated particle), it instead starts with the much simpler photon.

There are more details in my essay.

I would be interested to know what you think.

All the best,

David

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Pavel Vadimovich Poluian wrote on May. 15, 2020 @ 11:09 GMT
Dear Antoine Tilloy!

Your article refers to real fundamental issues. It's great! We rated your essay to the maximum (10 points), we liked everything! The found images are very expressive. We think that the basic metaphysics of this issue is the opposition of discrete and continuum. Collapse - is a gap. We think that here we can talk about ATEMPORARY EVENT (Hegel's 'Wesen is gewesen'). And at the macro level, we can say that the acceleration of the macrobody occurs spasmodically. It is possible with this axiom to begin classical kinematics.

Truly yours,

Pavel Poluian and Dmitry Lichargin,

Siberian Federal University.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jochen Szangolies wrote on May. 15, 2020 @ 16:11 GMT
Dear Antoine,

happily, I stumbled across your essay before the close of the contest. You provide an intriguing discussion of the GRW model that was, in this form, completely unknown to me. Granted, I have never studied collapse models in detail---essentially, to me, they're an option that I don't expect will be borne out, but with which I would be completely happy if it does (it would mean...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Arnold wrote on May. 16, 2020 @ 06:46 GMT
It is unfortunate that the equation describing the probability of an event was called a "wave function." It is actually a description of probability, and it defines the CURVE expressing various probabilities. A probability curve is not a physical thing that "collapses", with or without a pop. When a probability becomes an actuality, the curve function is simply resolved.

You mentioned Schrodinger’s Cat. Instead of a cat, place a clock in a glass vacuum vessel inside the box. The clock can only run in a vacuum. If a particle decays and breaks the glass, the clock dies. Open the box and see for yourself: If the clock stopped you can see by the indicated time that it had nothing to do with your wave-function collapse, and it was always either running or not. "Superposition is a superposition of probabilities, Let's get real.

Quantum theory (not quantum mechanics) has been just another expensive deviation in the history of science.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Member Daniel Sudarsky wrote on May. 16, 2020 @ 18:27 GMT
Dear Antoine,

I very much enjoyed your essay (as I have previously enjoyed your papers and our discussions).

So, let me take the opportunity to ask for your reaction to my challenge to one particular aspect of your posture. It concerns an issue which we have previously discussed to some extent, but I think your essay gives us the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate
Author Antoine Tilloy Tilloy replied on May. 18, 2020 @ 12:33 GMT
Dear Daniel,

Thank you very much for your thoughtful comment on my essay, it means a lot.

I have been thinking quite a lot on this problem of linearity, and so before trying to answer your points on this, let me try to explain how I evolved on this question. As you have perhaps noted, my discussion of this in the essay is at the same time more careful and shorter than in previous...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share

Member Daniel Sudarsky replied on May. 22, 2020 @ 02:06 GMT
Dear Antoine,

Thanks you very much for your kind and thoughtful reply.

It would indeed be nice to have more opportunities to discus this and other issues.

Let me just react here to one of your statements.:

" I remain convinced that the price to pay to have fundamental non-linearity is much higher than people think. Nicolas Gisin's formulation of the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on May. 16, 2020 @ 19:22 GMT
Antoine,

Fascinating approach, beautifully presented, but perhaps you might give me your view on whether this 'DFM' mechanistic sequence recently published may have any effect on your last line conclusion;

Pairs retain a common polar axis, so anti-parallel. A's polariser electrons are interacted with at some random tangent point latitude on a Poincare sphere. We know rotational momentum varies by Cos Latitude. We propose 'curl' changes inversely, +(-)1 at poles, 0 at equator. Rotation on all 3 axes is of course possible! Complex paired vector additions then give a new polarisation and effective 'elliptical major axis orientation' of the re-emission. Value change due to CosThetaLat.

A SECOND interaction with the (2 channel) photomultiplier electrons then gives a further CosTheta vulue to the first, so we have Cos^2Theta subject to each detector angle setting. 'Click' rate depends of which channel aligns with the major axis (intensity amplitude).

If you know your subject you should find that reproduces QM's data set and the Dirac equation with no A,B communication required. Indeed exactly as John Bell anticipated. Let me know.

My essay this year touches on that, referring to the fuller derivation last year, but also other consequences. (a paper is in peer review now).

Do ask any questions or give your advice.

Many thanks

Peter

Bookmark and Share
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.