Why does QM Make People Question Reality??

[Iwonderaboutthings]

I have studied QM for about 2 years now " on the extreme technical side", and am now realizing that many consider QM, as some type of virtual hyper reality in where consciousness " can change " things" for example:

 

Does consciousness really collapse the wave function?

 

 

Or can simple positive thoughts promote good health, a stress free life and make you just simply feel good?

 

Or maybe QM is just that mind boggling to understand??????

 

 

QM seems to describe a digital realm of subjects that almost seems to never end!

Terminologies after terminologies just lead to more and more questions not answers.

 

But, doesn't QM deal with:

 

atomic orbitals that answer physical questions?

 

black body radiation?

 

discrete amounts of quantized energy?

 

the energy of a photon??

 

 

Somewhere in all this I got lost "really"

 

 

It seems that we live in 2 separate worlds that at the physical level and QM level seems to clash, but somehow " both" still depend on each other for answers....

 

 

In one sense physics has the upper hand, but in the other sense QM has the the upper hand...

 

 

I know there are scientist out there that may understand this push and pull of both disciplines...

 

 

I highly doubt that QM is 100% authentic science in not dealing with some type of mystical realm because QM is known to be just that--->mysterious...

 

 

Perhaps this is a reason for it to be counter intuitive?? Not liked??? To Question Reality then??

 

 

 

Thinking about this though, If QM did not exist, how would it affect physics??

Edited April 17, 2014 by Iwonderaboutthings

[Prometheus]

Or maybe QM is just that mind boggling to understand??????

 

 

Think you hit the nail on the head there. Certainly spins my mind out - doesn't imply anything mystical going on though.

[swansont]

I think the issue is that QM deals in probabilities, and people are searching for some underlying truth of the matter to understand why that is. There are also those that think that the probabilities can't be right, so there must be some hidden classical truth that's being obscured.

 

Specifically to the main question of the OP, there are situations where you don't know what state the system is in when it's not being observed. This leads to the question of whether something exists when it's not being watched, though IMO the steps that lead from the former to the latter are often tenuous.

[Iwonderaboutthings]

I think the issue is that QM deals in probabilities, and people are searching for some underlying truth of the matter to understand why that is. There are also those that think that the probabilities can't be right, so there must be some hidden classical truth that's being obscured.

 

Specifically to the main question of the OP, there are situations where you don't know what state the system is in when it's not being observed. This leads to the question of whether something exists when it's not being watched, though IMO the steps that lead from the former to the latter are often tenuous.

Could it be that the system is time itself? " waves" multiples of time looped in a system as one big standing wave that represents 1 for an entire system shared by many observers?

 

 

Light Cones Describe this with some of these copy and pasted words under "Mathematical construction"

 

 

----->And I would really urge to read this area..

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_cone

 

In special relativity, a light cone (or null cone) is the surface describing the temporal evolution of a flash of light in Minkowski spacetime. This can be visualized in 3-space if the two horizontal axes are chosen to be spatial dimensions, while the vertical axis is time.

The light cone is constructed as follows.

Given an event , the light cone classifies all events in space+time into 5 distinct categories:

• Events on the future light cone
• Events on the past light cone
• Events inside the future light cone
• All other events are in the (absolute) elsewhere and are those that cannot affect.

The above classifications hold true in any frame of reference; that is, an event judged to be in the light cone by one observer, will also be judged to be in the same light cone by all other observers, no matter their frame of reference. This is why the concept is so powerful.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now coming back to my words and reply:

 

Photon Energy

 

Magnetic Waves

 

Particle Waves

 

Double Slit

 

Space Time Curvature

 

 

These all use some type of partial deferential calculations, they use trigonometry, they use pi ratio, Cartesian space.

Does " ordinary science" use these too? From what I know "yes" I just want to make sure here.

 

 

I really am utterly confused and somehow even discouraged as to what is really what in deciding the correct way to calculate something.. I feel twisted!

 

For examples, aren't waves more " analog than digital."

 

Meaning that waves from what I understand are analog, but QM is more digital " granular" multiples "discrete."

 

 

But waves do appear to describe some type of hidden energy that travels invisibly through matter..

To add, atomic orbitals and chemistry rely on the h constant's understanding...

 

 

Coupled with both Physics and QM, I don't see how it is even possible to be able to calculate anything in space in any region of time... I Don't see how it is possible how distance and time are related, they simply are inversion to each like a frequency and a period in time and in that location, but what is the location at in empty space, whom knows at this point...

 

 

Think you hit the nail on the head there. Certainly spins my mind out - doesn't imply anything mystical going on though.

One thing that mesmerizes me is this:

 

 

If you look at how the inverse square law works, imagine a cube that is being in-larged in all directions, imagine that the cube is thus divided into equal sections and that these section connect to vertices..

 

While the cube is being stretched out proportionally, the vertices remain still...

 

If you take the " invisible" in -larged cubed and connect all the vertices they resemble a tesseract cube:

 

The interesting part is this:

 

Notice how the 8 corners of this cube's vertices point in angles?

 

I have always pondered on this:

 

Is that a secant line???

 

Edited April 17, 2014 by Iwonderaboutthings