Albert Einstein & Quantum Mechanics

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Albert Einstein expressed significant skepticism towards quantum mechanics, primarily due to its probabilistic interpretation and issues like the EPR paradox. He advocated for a deterministic approach, famously stating, "God does not play dice with the universe." Despite his objections, the foundational principles of quantum mechanics have been integral to advancements in technology, including the development of transistors and solid-state physics, which rely heavily on quantum theory. The discussion highlights the ongoing evolution of physics and the critical role quantum mechanics plays in modern technology.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles
  • Familiarity with the EPR paradox and its implications
  • Knowledge of solid-state physics and semiconductor theory
  • Awareness of historical context regarding Einstein's views on determinism
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the EPR paradox and its significance in quantum mechanics
  • Study the principles of solid-state physics and their applications in modern technology
  • Explore the historical development of the transistor and its reliance on quantum theory
  • Investigate alternative interpretations of quantum mechanics beyond Einstein's views
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, electrical engineers, and students of quantum mechanics seeking to understand the historical context and technological implications of quantum theory.

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
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K