G Penrose: Quantum vs. Gravity Experiment on Page 35

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter RandallB
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Penrose Qm
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Roger Penrose's article in DISCOVER, specifically focusing on his proposed experiment related to quantum mechanics and gravity. Participants explore the implications of Penrose's ideas on the measurement problem in quantum mechanics, as well as the clarity of his explanations in different formats.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion regarding Penrose's claims about interference in quantum mechanics, noting a contradiction between his statements on destructive interference and the double slit experiment showing reinforcing interference.
  • Another participant suggests that the confusion may stem from the magazine's presentation rather than Penrose's original ideas, referencing a clearer explanation in Penrose's book "Road to Reality."
  • Discussion on the "nonlinear graviton" proposed by Penrose as a potential explanation for wave function collapse, with some participants noting that he does not advocate for a hidden variables theory.
  • A participant questions the nature of the measurement problem in quantum mechanics, seeking clarification on whether it is a paradox or related to limitations in measuring time and distance at quantum scales.
  • Further elaboration on the measurement problem is provided, discussing the implications of measurement in quantum mechanics and the philosophical interpretations, including the Copenhagen Interpretation and Many Worlds Interpretation, which Penrose critiques.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit a mix of agreement and disagreement, particularly regarding the clarity of Penrose's ideas and the interpretation of the measurement problem. There is no consensus on the implications of his proposed experiment or the validity of his claims.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in the clarity of the article compared to Penrose's book, and there are unresolved questions about the measurement problem and its interpretations.

RandallB
Messages
1,550
Reaction score
0
Anyone else see the Penrose article in DISCOVER? "Two places at once"

Not sure what he’s thinking with the “Experiment” he’s proposing on page 35. He seems to be claim that any interference between “states” or parts of an individual photon when if they come back together will always be destructive based on QM. But in the same article on page 31 shows a double slit example showing reinforcing interference, I don’t think QM has a problem with that.
Just don’t see where his tiny mirror “gravity” experiment makes any sense at all, QM should always expect to see light at his detector. It may include a pattern, but it will be there.


RB
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think your confusion may be from the author of the article rather than from Penrose. His description of the experiment in Road to Reality seemed a lot clearer than the magazine one for all the pretty pictures. Of course I may not have read the artcle as carefully as I did the book!

Penrose believes something called the "nonlinear graviton" may be responsible for collapsing the wave function. The rest of QM, the unitary part, uncertainty, and so on, he seems to accept, so he's not looking for a hidden variables theory as such, just a resolution of the measurement problem.
 
selfAdjoint said:
a resolution of the measurement problem.
What do you mean by the Measurement problem?
Is it represented by a ‘paradox’?
Or are you just referring to not being able to measure below a “Plank” for either time or distance as we try to see “where” and “when” a particle 'IS’.

Don't see how the "plan" as explained by the author of the artical will be helpful at all.
I'll look in his book for a better explanation of the intent.

RB
 
Measurement Problem

The Measurement problem in QM is that in order to find anything out about a quantum system, you have to do a "measurement"; mathematically this is represented by operating on the quantum state with a Hermitian or self adjoint operator, producing real eigenvalues, one of which the measurement selects for you find as the value you have measured. This roundabout procedure is problematical because it seems to imply a favored place for consciousness at the heart of physics.

Various interpretaions have been given for this, of which the two best known are the Copenhagen Interpretation("Yes mind is at the center because quantum physics isn't about quantum systems it is about our interactions with quantum systems") and the Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI) ("the wave function never collapses, all of the eigenvalues are manifested in different observational "sectors" of relativity). Penrose, in Road.. expresses dissatisfaction with both of these.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
10K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K