Danny Ross Lunsford
Apr16-04, 05:51 AM
<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>\n\nArnold Neumaier wrote:\n\n> What really happens is that hbar is a free parameter in a family\n> of quantum theories. One particular choice of them corresponds to\n> physical reality, and the limit hbar to zero corresponds to a classical\n> world. Of course, since the real world is known not to be classical,\n> one cannot take the limit in reality, where hbar is fixed.\n\nThis brings up a strange idea...\n\nFor finite h, a sane interpretation of QM says - the WF describes the\nexperimental setup (what we know about the system we are going to study)\nand the possible outcomes of experiments are distributed in some\nspectral representation of it. Now classical mechanics (h=0) has 1\noutcome for any experiment. Can we imagine setting up a relationship\nbetween the number of possible outcomes and the value of h? There would\nthen be a meaning to varying h and seeing how the spectrum changes. As\nh->0 then N->1 for any experiment. So the question is - how does the\nspectrum vary with h?\n\n> Don\'t think the many excellent people were dudes!\n> Whenever there is a discrepancy between tradition and one\'s own\n> understanding, the reason lies in the vast majority of cases\n> in the latter.\n\nWell said!\n\n-drl\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form"> View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>Arnold Neumaier wrote:
> What really happens is that \hbar is a free parameter in a family
> of quantum theories. One particular choice of them corresponds to
> physical reality, and the limit \hbar to zero corresponds to a classical
> world. Of course, since the real world is known not to be classical,
> one cannot take the limit in reality, where \hbar is fixed.
This brings up a strange idea...
For finite h, a sane interpretation of QM says - the WF describes the
experimental setup (what we know about the system we are going to study)
and the possible outcomes of experiments are distributed in some
spectral representation of it. Now classical mechanics (h=0) has 1
outcome for any experiment. Can we imagine setting up a relationship
between the number of possible outcomes and the value of h? There would
then be a meaning to varying h and seeing how the spectrum changes. As
h->0 then N->1 for any experiment. So the question is - how does the
spectrum vary with h?
> Don't think the many excellent people were dudes!
> Whenever there is a discrepancy between tradition and one's own
> understanding, the reason lies in the vast majority of cases
> in the latter.
Well said!
-drl
> What really happens is that \hbar is a free parameter in a family
> of quantum theories. One particular choice of them corresponds to
> physical reality, and the limit \hbar to zero corresponds to a classical
> world. Of course, since the real world is known not to be classical,
> one cannot take the limit in reality, where \hbar is fixed.
This brings up a strange idea...
For finite h, a sane interpretation of QM says - the WF describes the
experimental setup (what we know about the system we are going to study)
and the possible outcomes of experiments are distributed in some
spectral representation of it. Now classical mechanics (h=0) has 1
outcome for any experiment. Can we imagine setting up a relationship
between the number of possible outcomes and the value of h? There would
then be a meaning to varying h and seeing how the spectrum changes. As
h->0 then N->1 for any experiment. So the question is - how does the
spectrum vary with h?
> Don't think the many excellent people were dudes!
> Whenever there is a discrepancy between tradition and one's own
> understanding, the reason lies in the vast majority of cases
> in the latter.
Well said!
-drl