Question about discussions around quantum interpretations

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ojitojuntos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Amateur Quantom physics
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the various interpretations of quantum mechanics, particularly focusing on deterministic versus non-deterministic models, the implications of Objective Collapse theories, and the measurement problem. Participants explore the philosophical and experimental aspects of these interpretations, as well as the challenges posed by quantum mechanics to traditional notions of determinism.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that the complexity of quantum interpretations arises from the lack of experimental data that definitively falsifies deterministic interpretations like Everett's.
  • Others argue that the measurement problem highlights fundamental randomness in the universe, with Bell tests and double-slit experiments supporting this view.
  • One participant suggests that if Objective Collapse theories are being challenged, it may imply a greater likelihood of a deterministic universe, though this remains speculative.
  • Another viewpoint emphasizes that any interpretation of quantum mechanics could potentially be true, given the abstract nature of quantum phenomena.
  • Some participants express that understanding quantum mechanics deeply is crucial before delving into its interpretations, referencing comprehensive textbooks as a foundation.
  • There is a discussion about the distinction between non-relativistic quantum mechanics and more comprehensive frameworks like Quantum Field Theory (QFT), with some asserting that QFT is an inevitable low-energy approximation of a more fundamental theory.
  • Participants highlight that many physicists accept the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics, challenging the belief in a fundamentally deterministic universe.
  • Some express that the notion of determinism might emerge from a lack of knowledge about complex systems, suggesting that non-determinism could be an effective description rather than a fundamental aspect of reality.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the nature of quantum interpretations, with multiple competing views remaining. There is ongoing debate about the implications of experimental results for determinism and the interpretation of quantum mechanics.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the unresolved status of various interpretations, the dependence on definitions of measurement and determinism, and the challenge of reconciling quantum mechanics with classical intuitions.

  • #151
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #152
ojitojuntos said:
Thank you so much for the explanation!
Guys, I recently read that objective collapse theories have been increasingly constrained. Does this mean that, indirectly, determinism has gained more plausibility over probabilistic interpretations?
No. The operationalis/instrumentalist account is probabilistic and has no objective collapse. Consistent histories is probabilistic and has no objective collapse. Recent nonmarkovian reformulations are probabilistic and have no objective collapse.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ojitojuntos and Fra
  • #153
ojitojuntos said:
Thank you so much for the explanation!
Guys, I recently read that objective collapse theories have been increasingly constrained. Does this mean that, indirectly, determinism has gained more plausibility over probabilistic interpretations?

I would say it rather makes the concept of objective probability less plausible as fundamental in a theory or interpretation where you insist that measurements and expectations are physical interactions and encodings as opposed to armchair mathematical constructs and "not real".

Ie. it makes it less plausible to think that objectively inferrable ~ real/ontic

/Fredrik
 
  • #154
Last edited:
  • #155
Thank you! Now, these past weeks I’ve tried to take some time off work to read a bit, but in afraid that I’m far from being able to grasp some of the concepts shared here.
I was wondering: Do QFT theories shift the balance towards a fully deterministic reading of nature vs a probabilistic one?

I tried to Google it, and learn from online sources, but the proliferation of AI articles and sensacionalista shows make it very hard to filter what is bogus and what not for a layman like me.

I even tried using AI to get a list of relevant articles, but most of them didn’t exist! Hahah

Again, I reallly appreciate your willingness to help me navigate these questions.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: physika and berkeman

Similar threads

  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 109 ·
4
Replies
109
Views
11K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
7K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K