Register to reply 
Does the hup essentially represent the wall or curtain of the universe? 
Share this thread: 
#1
Feb2012, 06:37 AM

P: 143

what i mean is, when you don't have any observable ability of whats going on behind a white curtain, if occurrences behind the curtain produce spots on the curtain which we see but we do no see their cause, we can only conclude that the spots appear at random.
i think its possible that an electrons behavior is so erratic that using probability to model the electron can achieve what some people regard as very precise predictions. i myself think that if electron behavior was truly probabilistic then qm would be infinitely more precise, perhaps giving absolute correct predictions, an that qm precision is incredibly imprecise compared possible levels of precision. the fact that we can only know so much doesnt bother me. its that i feel our minds our incredibly capable of intuitively understanding the actual nature of the universe, and possibly the most stubborn believer of this, einstein, was smarter than anybody on this forum. anybody who believes "God" plays dice or that there is such thing as a fair coin in this universe... i dont think they should be in physics. 


#2
Feb2012, 12:32 PM

P: 28

John Bell essentially addressed the concern that you are expressing. It has been shown that all the simple kinds of deterministic underlying physics are incompatible with observed facts. After all, observations is what we must build physics on. 


#3
Feb2012, 04:58 PM

P: 5,632

One goes to war with the technology one has in hand.



#4
Feb2012, 05:00 PM

P: 5,632

Does the hup essentially represent the wall or curtain of the universe?
Hardly our experience to date. There is not even evidence of any 'actual nature' of the universe. 


#5
Feb2012, 07:04 PM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 2,903

http://arxiv.org/pdf/quantph/0111068v1.pdf The HUP follows mathematically and rigorously from the commutation behaviour of the observables involved and is a natural consequence of the principles of QM  not a separate principle. Thanks Bill 


#6
Feb2012, 07:17 PM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 2,903

Yes and no to our minds being able to intuitively understand the nature of the universe. Experiment reveals its nature which at first can seem weird but after long acquaintance it seems much more intuitive and we can usually find ways of looking at it that is quite intuitive  such as the view QM is simply probability theory with pure states you can continuously go from one to other. IMHO our minds are quite adaptable but it is experiment that sets it on the right direction. This happened many times eg it is often forgotten that when Newton first proposed his gravitational theory he was in some quarters laughed at  but as over time it became so well accepted it now seems quite intuitive. Thanks Bill 


#7
Feb2112, 10:11 AM

P: 143

we regard qm to be true because of its predictability precision. couldnt you view our view of qms precision as being high compared to normal levels of measurement precision as a human intuition that precision equals truth? in other words you cant rule out a theory that explains hup without the assumption that the electons behavior is completely random can you? people used to assume the world was FLAT through observation. It took thinkers to suppose on what the reality truly was. probability has traditionally been used to model reality using the unreal concept of randomness. if electron behavior approaches theoretical true randomness, then of course qm theory which states that an electrons behavior IS random will be unbelievably precise. but using randomness as an assumption to get maximum predictability out of qm does not mean you cannot rule out the possibility of a theory that is more predictable, or less, but consistent with causality 


#8
Feb2112, 01:45 PM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 5,441

As to your second comment: you need to understand Bell's Theorem to see that in fact, the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle does not support the idea of noncommuting particle attributes existing simultaneously. This is where the randomness is introduced. 


Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
In binary can we have a value with deci centi mili or more lower valued prefix?  Computers  14  
Universe with only e+ , e , photons, and gravitation?  Beyond the Standard Model  7  
The happiest possible immortal universe?  Cosmology  0  
Difference between Identical , Equal , Equivalent  Calculus & Beyond Homework  9  
Two Reviews: God's Equation and Universe In A Nutshell  Science & Math Textbooks  9 