Determinism & Scale: Quantum Effects on Macroscopic Objects

  • Thread starter Thread starter popepius
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Determinism Scale
popepius
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi everybody,

there is this question that is bugging me and since I neither seem to know enough about physics to find out the answer myself nor to have the time to acquire said knowledge I will try to ask it here.

Objects of the microscopic world famously behave in an indeterministic way. But as I understand it the effects of the quantum level indeterminacies are diminished the bigger the observed objects are. If I understand that correctly the interaction of billiard balls bouncing of each other must be deterministic. Is that so? (Quantum interference for example can be observed in a double slit experiment that involves photons or even neutrons, but not billiard balls.)
If yes, is there a border that could be made out between the realm of micro and macroscopic objects?

I am sorry for the inaccuracy of my wording. If this is a stupid or obvious question, I beg your pardon.

All the best and thank you in advance
Popepius
 
Physics news on Phys.org
popepius said:
Hi everybody,

there is this question that is bugging me and since I neither seem to know enough about physics to find out the answer myself nor to have the time to acquire said knowledge I will try to ask it here.

Objects of the microscopic world famously behave in an indeterministic way. But as I understand it the effects of the quantum level indeterminacies are diminished the bigger the observed objects are. If I understand that correctly the interaction of billiard balls bouncing of each other must be deterministic. Is that so? (Quantum interference for example can be observed in a double slit experiment that involves photons or even neutrons, but not billiard balls.)
If yes, is there a border that could be made out between the realm of micro and macroscopic objects?

I am sorry for the inaccuracy of my wording. If this is a stupid or obvious question, I beg your pardon.

All the best and thank you in advance
Popepius

Welcome to PhysicsForums, Popepius!

Your question is fine. There is no exact boundary. As you get more and more particles together, the uncertainty (which can loosely be considered as the indeterminism you refer too) decreases very rapidly. Large objects therefore act as if they are much more deterministic.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top