Search

Usually, the idea of probability is applied only to the random motion in physics. Here, the instant probability concept is obtained by applying the probability approach to objects with deterministic motion trajectories via a coin falling to the ground as an example. Applied this concept to understand quantum mechanics, the following conclusions are inferred: The wave function/quantum state represents an instant probability distribution of physical quantities after taking into account Planck's constant; the collapse of the wave function is a special case of any function on time-dependent probability prediction has to collapse when performing measurement. The arrangement of measurements will affect the observed results; Quantum mechanics reveals the existence of non-local effects, which have nothing to do with the interaction in classical physics. Quantum mechanics cannot answer questions such as whether the cat is dead or alive before opening the box. The correct answer to this kind of question has to be from classic physics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Astrophysicists and cosmologists seriously propose that our universe, with its three dimensions and local physical bylaws, is one of an infinite number of parallel universes. This paper discusses the relevance of these ideas for contemporary systemic family therapy, such as thinking about the therapist's positioning in relation to the family. Ideas such as the anthropic principle suggest each meeting of a therapist and family forms a unique systemic entity or singularity with its own universe of by‐laws peculiar to a location in time and space. We are like travellers between parallel family therapy universes where the therapist's epistemology, theory or model is less important than how therapists and clients position themselves towards each other. This ecological positioning encompasses contextual, emotional, cultural, ethical and spiritual belief systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We give a general proof showing that if the evolution from one state to another is not reversible, then the projective measurements on the superposition of these two states are impossible. Applying this no-go result to the Schrödinger’s cat paradox implies that if something is claimed to be a real Schrödinger’s cat, there will be no measurable difference between it and a trivial classical mixture of ordinary cats in any physically implementable process, unless raising the dead becomes reality. Other similar macroscopic quantum superpositions cannot be observed either, due to the lack of non-commuting measurement bases. Our proof does not involve any quantum interpretation theory and hypothesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The text discusses an article about the so-called "quantum cat breeding," which is a concept related to the areas of quantum physics and imaginescopy. It focuses especially on the process of the so-called "breeding of worlds," particularly on the specific case of breeding (multiplying) feral worlds as an attempt to explain the growing information chaos, mainly in the network area (with particular emphasis on social media), but with important references to the physical world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We discuss V.P. Belavkin's approach to the Schrödinger cat problem and show its close relation to ideas based on superselection and interaction with the environment developed by N.P. Landsman. The purpose of the paper is to explain these ideas in the most simple possible context, namely: discrete time and separable Hilbert spaces, in order to make them accessible to those coming from the philosophy of science and not too happy with idiosyncratic notation and terminology and sophisticated mathematical tools. Conventional elementary mathematical descriptions of quantum mechanics take "measurement" to be a primitive concept. Paradoxes arise when we choose to consider smaller or larger systems as measurement devices in their own right, by making different and apparently arbitrary choices of location of the "Heisenberg cut". Various quantum interpretations have different resolutions of the paradox. In Belavkin's approach, the classical world around us does really exist, and it evolves stochastically and dynamically in time according to probability laws following from successive applications of the Born law. It is a collapse theory. The quantum/classical distinction is determined by the arrow of time. The underlying unitary evolution of the wave-function of the universe enables the designation of a collection of beables which grows as time evolves, and which therefore can be assigned random, classical trajectories. In a slogan: the past is particles, the future is a wave. We, living in the now, are located on the cutting edge between past and future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper states and gives three applications of a novel ‘Presentist Fragmentalist’ interpretation of quantum mechanics. In a cognate paper it was explicitly shown this kind of presentism is consistent with special relativity and that it has implications for how to understand time as it relates to the Big Bang (Merriam in Axiomathes, , 2021). In this paper we narrowly focus on three applications. These are surely the most important conundrums for any proposed interpretation of quantum mechanics: Schrodinger’s Cat, Bell non-locality, and the Born rule. It will be shown that these can be handled in a consistent and intuitive way. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is to invalidate the hypothesis that human consciousness is necessary in the quantum measurement process. In order to achieve this target, I propose a considerable modification of the Schrödinger’s cat and the Dead-Alive Physicist thought experiments, called “PIAR”, short for “Physicist Inside the Ambiguous Room”. A specific strategy has enabled me to plan the experiment in such a way as to logically justify the inconsistency of the above hypothesis and to oblige its supporters to rely on an alternative interpretation of quantum mechanics in which a real world of phenomena exists independently of our conscious mind and where observers play no special role. Moreover, the description of the measurement apparatus will be complete, in the sense that the experiment, given that it includes also the experimenter, will begin and end exclusively within a sealed room. Hence, my analysis will provide a logical explanation of the relationship between the observer and the objects of her/his experimental observation; this and a few other implications will be discussed in the fourth section and in the conclusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Certainly, a Smarandache multispace or multisystem eS is a union of m distinct spaces or systems S1; S2,..., Sm which is an appropriate model on things T in the universe because of the limitation of humans ourselves and a thing T is complex, even overlap with other things. However, nearly all observation data on T is a multiple one eS which implies Si and Sj are entangled if Si T Sj 6=;, we have to disentangle Si from Sj, 1 < i 6= j < m for hold on the reality of thing T. Thus, disentangling a multi-space eS to self-enclosed spaces or systems S1; S2,..., Sm is interesting, also valuable in hold on the reality of things in the universe. The main purpose of this paper is to discuss the disentangling ways on a Smarandache multispace or multisystem if we assume that each self-enclosed space or system of Si; 1 < i < m is endowed with mathematical elements such as those of topological, geometrical, algebraic structures or generally, each space or system of Si has a character i different from others for integers 1 < i < m. As it happens, this problem is equivalent to Schrodinger's cat of quantum mechanics in the case of m = 2, which are extensively applied in quantum teleportation for preparation, distribution and measurement of the entangled pairs of particles and prospecting us to design a general key carrier on the Smarandachely entangling pairs in commutation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why does such a successful theory like Quantum Mechanics have so many mysteries? The history of this theory is replete with dubious interpretations and controversies, and yet a knowledge of its predictions, however, contributed to the amazing technological revolution of the last hundred years. In its very beginning Einstein pointed out that there was something missing, due to contradictions with the relativity theory. So, even though Quantum Mechanics explains all the nanoscale physical phenomena, there were many attempts to find a way to "complete" it, e.g. hidden-variable theories. In this paper, we discuss some of those enigmas, with special attention to the concepts of physical reality imposed by quantum mechanics, the role of the observer, prediction limits, a definition of collapse, and how to deal with correlated states (the basic strategy for quantum computers and quantum teleportation). That discussion is carried out within the framework of accepting that there is in fact nothing important missing, rather we are just restricted by the limitations imposed by quantum mechanics. The mysteries are thus explained by a proper interpretation of those limitations, which is achieved by introducing two interpretation rules within the Copenhagen paradigm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why does such a successful theory like Quantum Mechanics have so many mysteries? The history of this theory is replete with dubious interpretations and controversies, and yet a knowledge of its predictions, however, contributed to the amazing technological revolution of the last hundred years. In its very beginning Einstein pointed out that there was something missing, due to contradictions with the relativity theory. So, even though Quantum Mechanics explains all the nanoscale physical phenomena, there were many attempts to find a way to “complete” it, e.g. hidden-variable theories. In this paper, we discuss some of those enigmas, with special attention to the concepts of physical reality imposed by quantum mechanics, the role of the observer, prediction limits, a definition of collapse, and how to deal with correlated states (the basic strategy for quantum computers and quantum teleportation). That discussion is carried out within the framework of accepting that there is in fact nothing important missing, rather we are just restricted by the limitations imposed by quantum mechanics. The mysteries are thus explained by a proper interpretation of those limitations, which is achieved by introducing two interpretation rules within the Copenhagen paradigm.

We discuss V.P. Belavkin’s approach to the Schrödinger cat problem and show its close relation to ideas based on superselection and interaction with the environment developed by N.P. Landsman. The purpose of the paper is to explain these ideas in the most simple possible context, namely: discrete time and separable Hilbert spaces, in order to make them accessible to those coming from the philosophy of science and not too happy with idiosyncratic notation and terminology and sophisticated mathematical tools. Conventional elementary mathematical descriptions of quantum mechanics take “measurement” to be a primitive concept. Paradoxes arise when we choose to consider smaller or larger systems as measurement devices in their own right, by making different and apparently arbitrary choices of location of the “Heisenberg cut”. Various quantum interpretations have different resolutions of the paradox. In Belavkin’s approach, the classical world around us does really exist, and it evolves stochastically and dynamically in time according to probability laws following from successive applications of the Born law. It is a collapse theory. The quantum/classical distinction is determined by the arrow of time. The underlying unitary evolution of the wave-function of the universe enables the designation of a collection of beables which grows as time evolves, and which therefore can be assigned random, classical trajectories. In a slogan: the past is particles, the future is a wave. We, living in the now, are located on the cutting edge between past and future.

A semiclassical phase‐space perspective of band‐ and topological‐insulator regimes of 2D Dirac materials and normal‐ and superradiant phases of atom‐field interacting models is given in terms of delocalization, entropies, and quantum correlation measures. From this point of view, the low‐energy limit of tight‐binding models describing the electronic band structure of topological 2D Dirac materials such as phosphorene and silicene with tunable band gaps share similarities with Rabi‐Dicke and Jaynes‐Cummings atom‐field interaction models, respectively. In particular, the edge state of the 2D Dirac materials in the topological insulator phase exhibits a Schrödinger's cat structure similar to the ground state of two‐level atoms in a cavity interacting with a one‐mode radiation field in the superradiant phase. Delocalization seems to be a common feature of topological insulator and superradiant phases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is to refute the hypothesis that the observer’s consciousness is necessary in the quantum mechanics measurement process. In order to achieve our target, we propose and investigate a variation of the Schrödinger’s cat thought experiment called “DAP”, short for “Dead-Alive Physicist”, in which a human being replaces the cat. This strategy enables us to logically disprove the consistency of the above hypothesis, and to oblige its supporters either to be trapped in solipsism or to rely on an alternative interpretation of quantum mechanics in which the conscious observer plays the sole role of acknowledging the experimental results. Our analysis hence provides support to clarify the relationship between the observer and the objects of her/his experimental observation; this and a few other implications are discussed in the fourth section and in the conclusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article I explore the possibility of being able to hear the sound of a quantum superposition of two sounds. What would it mean and is it feasible to explore performing an experiment that would allow us to test this notion?

Recently, Frauchiger and Renner proposed a Gedankenexperiment, which was claimed to be able to prove that quantum theory cannot consistently describe the use of itself. Here we show that the conclusions of Frauchiger and Renner actually came from their incorrect description of some quantum states. With the correct description there will be no inconsistent results, no matter which quantum interpretation theory is used. Especially, the Copenhagen interpretation can satisfy all the three assumptions (C), (Q), and (S) of Frauchiger and Renner simultaneously, thus it has no problem consistently describing the use of itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Frauchiger–Renner Paradox is an extension of paradoxes based on the "Problem of Measurement," such as Schrödinger's Cat and Wigner's Friend. All these paradoxes stem from assuming that quantum theory has only unitary (linear) physical dynamics, and the attendant ambiguity about what counts as a 'measurement'—i.e., the inability to account for the observation of determinate measurement outcomes from within the theory itself. This paper discusses a basic inconsistency arising in the FR scenario at a much earlier point than the derived contradiction: namely, the inconsistency inherent in treating an improper mixture (reduced density operator) as a proper, epistemic mixture. This is an illegitimate procedure that is nevertheless endemic if quantum theory is assumed to be always unitary. In contrast, under a non-unitary account of quantum state reduction yielding determinate outcomes, the use of a proper mixture for measurement results becomes legitimate, and this entire class of paradoxes cannot be mounted. The conclusion is that the real lesson of the FR paradox is that it is the unitary-only assumption that needs to be critically reassessed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Quantum theory is extremely successful in describing the micro cosmos. The caveat is that nobody knows what quantum objects really are. Consequently, the intention of this article is not to introduce any new formalism but to develop some ideas about the ontological meaning of quantum theory. The centerpiece of quantum theory, the Schrödinger equation, requires a deterministic development of quantum systems; measurements however show an indeterministic distribution of measurement values. All previous interpretations of quantum theory are dubious. Here we will present a new understanding of one of the key features of quantum theory, namely, of superposition. Contrary to the previous understanding of the concept, we assume that superposition represents an oscillation between different states. This will lead to a completely new understanding of the universe and of quantum objects. Quantum objects are no longer considered to be elements in space, rather they are considered to be properties of space, namely, possibilities for interaction. The new understanding also leads to the conclusion that space and time are discrete. This entirely new concept will finally provide some relief for Schrödinger's cat. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]