Albert Einstein & Quantum Mechanics

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Albert Einstein's views on quantum mechanics, exploring his objections to its probabilistic nature, the implications of the EPR paradox, and the relationship between quantum mechanics and technological advancements such as transistors. The conversation touches on theoretical interpretations and the historical context of quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that Einstein was critical of the probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics and preferred deterministic theories.
  • Others mention Einstein's discomfort with the EPR paradox and his belief in hidden variable theories, despite later developments showing local hidden variable theories to be impossible.
  • There is a debate about the extent to which quantum mechanics contributed to the development of technologies like transistors, with some arguing that quantum mechanics was foundational while others challenge this view.
  • Participants reference Einstein's famous quote, "God does not play dice with the universe," to illustrate his stance on determinism versus probability in physics.
  • Some express the view that Einstein's objections may have stemmed from a lack of knowledge about other interpretations of quantum mechanics.
  • There are assertions that while quantum mechanics has led to significant advancements, there remain unresolved problems in the field.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on Einstein's objections to quantum mechanics and the implications of those objections. There is no consensus on the relationship between quantum mechanics and technological advancements, particularly regarding transistors.

Contextual Notes

Some claims about the contributions of quantum mechanics to technology depend on interpretations of quantum theory and its historical development. The discussion reflects ongoing debates in the field without resolving them.

jhooper3581
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
Okay, I have heard that Albert Einstein wasn't really into this whole idea of quantum mechanics. What was some of the reasons for this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
He didn't like the probabilistic interpretation of it among more technical problems. He was also bothered by things like the EPR paradox and felt that there must be a hidden variable theory (although later, local hidden variables theories were determined to be impossible). In general, basically all of his specific objections have been smoothed over since then.
 
Okay, thanks for the reply! I'm very confident that physics will get advanced as time goes by.
 
jhooper3581 said:
Okay, thanks for the reply! I'm very confident that physics will get advanced as time goes by.

Advanced from what? Look around you. We're in the digital age, the age that quantum built. Quantum mechanics gave us the transistor, electronics, LCD screens, lasers, etc.
 
I don't think that QM "gave us" the transistor... What specific QM idea is involved in the goold old Schokley BJT ?!

Of course, solid state built up on QM, but it's like saying Newton gave us the big-bang theory...
 
sokrates said:
I don't think that QM "gave us" the transistor... What specific QM idea is involved in the goold old Schokley BJT ?!

Of course, solid state built up on QM, but it's like saying Newton gave us the big-bang theory...

Well you need quantum to get condensed and solid state and get quasi-particle treatment of holes and such. I mean all of our understanding of semiconductors comes from quantum. A quantum particle in an infinite, vanishly weak periodic potential basically.
 
he said that probability was not physics at all... am i right?
 
ngjingyi said:
he said that probability was not physics at all... am i right?

He believed that one could do without probabilities, in a deterministic way.
 
ngjingyi said:
he said that probability was not physics at all... am i right?

well he said "God does not play dice with the universe".
 
  • #10
maverick_starstrider said:
well he said "God does not play dice with the universe".

to which Niels Bohr replied "Stop telling God what to do with his dice."
 
  • #11
Unfortunately Einstein did not know other interpretations.
 
  • #12
maverick_starstrider said:
Advanced from what? Look around you. We're in the digital age, the age that quantum built. Quantum mechanics gave us the transistor, electronics, LCD screens, lasers, etc.
Man are you saying....Physics will always grow.Such are wonderful yes but as they been perfected no. They are problems and there will always be problems
 
  • #13
maverick_starstrider said:
well he said "God does not play dice with the universe".
Metaphysics can't be mixed with physics total foolishness.
 
  • #14
sokrates said:
I don't think that QM "gave us" the transistor... What specific QM idea is involved in the goold old Schokley BJT ?!

Plenty of QM was involved, the whole theoretical development was done on a basis of QM theory - what other theory was there? Go look at Shockley's and Bardeen's papers from 1947-50. Even when not using quantum theory explicitly, they were still working from it.

Of course, solid state built up on QM, but it's like saying Newton gave us the big-bang theory...

Equating those two things is a lot more far-fetched than saying transistors and solid state theory were a consequence of QM. About 250 years elapsed between the publication of Principia and the Big Bang theory. Quantum mechanics to the development of the transistor was about 20.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K