Copenhagen interpretation & Delayed-choice quantum eraser

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment and a proposed modification to the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. Participants explore the implications of this modification, particularly concerning time travel and the nature of wavefunction collapse.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests a metaphorical interpretation of the wavefunction as a cloud that rains drops of information throughout time, proposing that this could resolve issues related to time travel and causality in quantum mechanics.
  • Another participant questions the validity of the proposed modification, asking for references and indicating that personal speculation is not permitted in the forum.
  • A third participant expresses confusion about the original post and seeks guidance on understanding the delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment and its interpretations.
  • A later reply reiterates that the original post does not pose a question and characterizes it as personal speculation, suggesting that the thread does not align with forum guidelines.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the appropriateness of the original post, with some asserting it is speculative and off-limits, while others express a desire for clarification and guidance on the topic.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in understanding the implications of quantum mechanics interpretations and the boundaries of acceptable speculation within the forum.

johnconner
Messages
26
Reaction score
2
For explaining Delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment, what if I change the Copenhagen interpretation a little.

When the experiment is concluded, we observe one detector (the first detector with the shortest path) has detected the pattern long before the wavefunction is collapsed (before the last D detector detects the last ray of photons with identified and known path). Now that seems to be time travel which is not accepted by physicists. Now Let’s go with a metaphor. Say above the line of Time (with an arrow towards future), we have a cloud that is wavefunction. When this wavefunction is collapsed for the entangled particles (The system as a whole to be precise), in this metaphor, we say the cloud will rain. Dropping its drops of rain in each specific moment on the line of time. Which means the could (which is the wavefunction) is not only independent of time but it must hold through time. So the change happens throughout time without traveling in it. All I am suggesting is that the wavefunction should be accepted as a concept that must hold through time, so when it’s collapsed the time of events align with the narrative of wavefunction. This way there will be no traveling in time or any violations of relativity and causality would still hold.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2
Physics news on Phys.org
johnconner said:
what if I change the Copenhagen interpretation a little.

Do you have a reference for this changed interpretation? Personal speculation is off limits at PF. That includes speculation about QM interpretations.
 
PeterDonis said:
Do you have a reference for this changed interpretation? Personal speculation is off limits at PF. That includes speculation about QM interpretations.
It's more of a question really. Since I don't understand it very well I need guidance to understand it. I constantly think about things I learn and this is currently bugging me that I can't figure out. I would appreciate it if you help me with this.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2
johnconner said:
It's more of a question really.

Your OP is not asking a question. It is personal speculation.

johnconner said:
Since I don't understand it very well I need guidance to understand it.

Understand what?

If you want to understand how basic QM, without any intepretation applied, handles the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment, you can start a new thread in the QM forum asking about that.

If you want to understand how a particular QM interpretation describes the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment, you can start a new thread in this forum asking about that.

What this thread is doing is neither of those things. It is describing your own made up QM interpretation. That is off limits here at PF.

Thread closed.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy, Motore and Delta2

Similar threads

  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
8K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K