About an (informal, discussion-oriented) Quantum Physics model

In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of using simple mathematical calculations based on arithmetic properties to render (pseudo)random number sequences. This idea is applied to understanding uncertainty and superposition in quantum physics by considering particles as prominent, assembled, concentrated wave packets or groups with inharmonic and noisy relationships between each other. However, the conversation also acknowledges that this is a speculative theory and may not provide a verifiable alternative to existing theories in quantum mechanics.
  • #1
snnmbr
4
0
Hi there, you know there are simple mathematical calculations, rather based on arithmetic properties (module, commensurability, etc), that manage to render (pseudo)random number sequences.

You have to be familiarized with some properties and characters of waves I'm going to refer here (no sh*t Sherlock), because at this time I can't develop more than a quick verbal description of the idea.

An introduction. Imagine a regular frequency sequence with times T1, T2, T3, ... ; and another different regular frequency sequence with times t1, t2, t3, ... . Imagine that both frequencies are inharmonic, "strange" to each other. And let's take every Tn -> Tn+1 as a constant single frame of relative reference. We would observe then, within this Tn -> Tn+1 frame, that times t1, t2, t3, ... might present themselves and behave in a "strange", randomwise manner. So the question is: could this strange, randomwise behavior of tn between Tn, be taken as a good model for understanding uncertainty \ superposition \ Quantum Physics ? (applied to space case).

Imagine that, similar to how we do with numbers to get randomness, one day we found out that, if we choose a set of several (perhaps many) wave rays in a "careful manner" (meaning this we secure certain quantitative relations among waves, such as degree of incommensurability or "strangeness" or "noise" among wavelengths, etc) and if we then compose those waves among them, we get so a final composite ray, for example, from point A to point B, constituted by certain prominent concentrated wave packets or groups, irregularly, unrelatedly, randomwise, and so "isolatedly" happening between A and B, not constituting a regular recurrent set. Point B would "feel" those packets in an "unrelated individualist manner".

From this point of view, particles would be prominent, assembled, concentrated wave packets or groups, not constituting a regular frequency between each other, and so acting as irregular, unrelated, random "individualist pulses", due to the inharmonic, noisy, "ugly" relation among the base waves.

I wonder if this could be a reasonable alternative, to get rid of the insanely mystic visions of modern Quantum Physics.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
snnmbr said:
I wonder if this could be a reasonable alternative, to get rid of the insanely mystic visions of modern Quantum Physics.

Welcome to PhysicsForums, snnmbr!

In any alternative hypothesis, you will want to explain how existing phenomena occur, and where that hypothesis gives an experimentally verifiable - yet different - result. Quantum mechanics already does a great job of explaining what goes on experimentally. The mysticism is really more a component of popular articles anyway.

P.S. You should also be aware that speculative theories are not allowed to be discussed on this board.
 
  • #3
Hi DrChinese, thanks a lot for your welcome, Physics Forums is a great idea. The model or the idea I have commented is not developed into variables and operations, but, except for this, is a logical and objective structure (you can even consider it a geometric sketch, which uses well defined objects such as waves) to picture, delineate empirical observations (in particular, I was thinking of double slit experiment). And I should add I've just commented this model not as proposing "a new theory" (and so not as "unproposing" preexisting theories), but only as providing a little informal tool for provisionally staging a quantum phenomenom, within the mere scope of a slight discussion. It's just about expressing opinions; the notion I've talked about does not intend to be speculative; rather a simple "descriptive" exercise. What, I know it is unnecessary to explain to you, perfectly falls within a legitimate scientific method. I would never misuse this forum to try to beat any existing theory. In reality, to be honest, my true motivations with this thread have been only that I've felt curious about the model I have initially described.
 
Last edited:

Related to About an (informal, discussion-oriented) Quantum Physics model

1. What is quantum physics?

Quantum physics is a branch of physics that studies the behavior of particles on a very small scale, such as atoms and subatomic particles. It describes the fundamental principles that govern the behavior of these particles and how they interact with each other and the world around us.

2. How does quantum physics differ from classical physics?

Quantum physics differs from classical physics in that it takes into account the principles of quantum mechanics, which describe the probabilistic nature of particles and their behavior. Classical physics, on the other hand, is based on the laws of classical mechanics, which describe the behavior of macroscopic objects.

3. What is an informal, discussion-oriented quantum physics model?

An informal, discussion-oriented quantum physics model is a simplified representation of quantum physics concepts that is used for educational or explanatory purposes. It may not be as rigorous or mathematically precise as a formal model, but it can help to provide a basic understanding of complex quantum phenomena.

4. How are quantum physics models used in real-world applications?

Quantum physics models are used in a wide range of real-world applications, such as in the development of new technologies like quantum computers and quantum sensors. They are also used in various fields of research, including chemistry, materials science, and biology.

5. What are some common misconceptions about quantum physics?

Some common misconceptions about quantum physics include the idea that it only applies to the microscopic world, or that it can be used to explain supernatural phenomena. Another misconception is that quantum physics allows for instantaneous communication or travel, which is not supported by scientific evidence.

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
6
Views
748
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
847
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
25
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Back
Top