Quantum Objects

[John Jones]

There are three (possibly four) types of object in the world, two of which are the subject of physics.

 

Of these three objects, one is a material object, another is an object of experience (like colours and sounds), and the third type of object is a quantum object. Material objects obey the laws of material objects: they do not vanish and appear but they can be hidden and revealed. Perceptual or experiential objects obey the laws of experience: they vanish and appear but cannot be hidden or revealed.

 

But what are the laws of quantum objects? Quantum objects seem, or are claimed, to vanish and appear like experiential objects, yet also can be hidden and revealed like material objects. Such a juncture of object behaviours brings the quantum object close in description (perilously?) to that fourth class of objects deemed as "superstitions". A superstitious object is an object of experience made material (mind over matter, animism, etc), or a material object made experiential ("vanishing", miracles, etc).

 

But a quantum object doesn't quite fit the bill as a superstitious object - even though the quantum object is affected by mind or an "observer" according to some interpretations of quantum theory. This is because the quantum object isn't taken to be merely "material" or "experiential". We give the quantum object some conceptual leeway in this regard. However, the only option that offers a description of the quantum object is the one already given - that it is that class of objects that, unlike material objects, both vanish and appear and, unlike experiential objects, can be hidden and revealed. This makes quantum objects different from the superstitious object which can change its objectual status from material to experiential and vice versa.

[lemur]

I like how you use vanish/appear and hidden/revealed to distinguish materiality and experientiality. I also think it's funny that you compare quantum objects with superstition. More seriously, though, it alludes to an issue I've been think about lately which is what exactly "quantum" refers to. People sometimes use it to mean anything at the level of elementary particles, but that doesn't really make sense imo because "quantum" refers to quantification, which may refer to the fact that quantum theory deals in multiplicities of particles rather than particles individually. Originally, I think "quanta" referred to the discreet "packets" of energy that Max Planck found to occur in fixed amounts according to light frequency by studying black-body radiation. I would be curious to hear what people with more expertise in this matter have to say.

[John Jones]

I like how you use vanish/appear and hidden/revealed to distinguish materiality and experientiality. I also think it's funny that you compare quantum objects with superstition. More seriously, though, it alludes to an issue I've been think about lately which is what exactly "quantum" refers to. People sometimes use it to mean anything at the level of elementary particles, but that doesn't really make sense imo because "quantum" refers to quantification, which may refer to the fact that quantum theory deals in multiplicities of particles rather than particles individually. Originally, I think "quanta" referred to the discreet "packets" of energy that Max Planck found to occur in fixed amounts according to light frequency by studying black-body radiation. I would be curious to hear what people with more expertise in this matter have to say.

 

 

In this forum, and in quantum science, any analysis of the meaning of the term "quantum" is considered a threat to quantum science. This poverty of definition allows "quantum" science to employ mismatched metaphors and colloquialisms in an abortive, though accepted, attempt to bring some semblance of meaning to a dry, meaningless, pragmatic-only quantum mathematics.

 

I don't have any more to say on it as this situation disgusts me.

[Sisyphus]

I like how you use vanish/appear and hidden/revealed to distinguish materiality and experientiality. I also think it's funny that you compare quantum objects with superstition. More seriously, though, it alludes to an issue I've been think about lately which is what exactly "quantum" refers to. People sometimes use it to mean anything at the level of elementary particles, but that doesn't really make sense imo because "quantum" refers to quantification, which may refer to the fact that quantum theory deals in multiplicities of particles rather than particles individually. Originally, I think "quanta" referred to the discreet "packets" of energy that Max Planck found to occur in fixed amounts according to light frequency by studying black-body radiation. I would be curious to hear what people with more expertise in this matter have to say.

 

It literally means quantum. The study of physics at the level of discrete entities, as opposed to continuous values of classical physics.

[lemur]

It literally means quantum. The study of physics at the level of discrete entities, as opposed to continuous values of classical physics.

 

Discrete because that is in their physical nature or discreet because it is more convenient for counting and subsequent mathematical operations?

[swansont]

It literally means quantum. The study of physics at the level of discrete entities, as opposed to continuous values of classical physics.

 

You are now considered to be a threat to quantum physics. Apparently.

 

Discrete because that is in their physical nature or discreet because it is more convenient for counting and subsequent mathematical operations?

 

That's the underlying issue — we can't determine what the physical nature is unless we can do an experiment to confirm it, and quantum physics tells us that there are limits to what we can see. Entities behave as waves, which is typically much easier to see at the scale of the very small, and yet certain values of properties are discrete under these conditions. You will not be able to excite Hydrogen from the n=1 to n=2 level, for example, with a photon that has an energy other than 10.2 eV.