Fair dice and two slit experiment

  • Thread starter Pjpic
  • Start date
  • #1
234
1

Main Question or Discussion Point

The number that comes up on a die seems to be determined by mechanics - not probability; eventhough dice are used to explain probability. Is there a analogus process that determines where a photon will fall in the double split experiment - eventhough it is explained by probability?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
DrChinese
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,236
1,046
The number that comes up on a die seems to be determined by mechanics - not probability; eventhough dice are used to explain probability. Is there a analogus process that determines where a photon will fall in the double split experiment - eventhough it is explained by probability?
No, there is no known analogous explanation.

1. Most quantum physicists do not think such exists, and current theory does not provide for such an explanation.

2. There are some possible interpretations that DO allow a determined outcome. Physicists in that camp say that due to unknowable initial conditions, we cannot predict the outcome - ever.
 
  • #3
234
1
No, there is no known analogous explanation.

1. Most quantum physicists do not think such exists, and current theory does not provide for such an explanation.

If it is not intial conditions, is probability itself thought to be acting on the photons, is it just left as an unknown, or is there some other cause postulated?
 
  • #4
DrChinese
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,236
1,046
No, there is no known analogous explanation.

1. Most quantum physicists do not think such exists, and current theory does not provide for such an explanation.

If it is not intial conditions, is probability itself thought to be acting on the photons, is it just left as an unknown, or is there some other cause postulated?
No one really knows. If you follow the interpretations of Quantum Mechanics, you will see that there are opinions all over the place. But everyone pretty well accepts that Quantum Mechanics, where it does speak, is correct.

So a lot of the interpretations are considered philosophical in some respects as the predictive results are all the same in every interpretation. Again, there are no shortage of viewpoints. That does not mean you are free to invent your own and it would be accepted: any interpretation that yields predictions different than QM wouldn't make sense. So there are significant constraints.
 

Related Threads for: Fair dice and two slit experiment

  • Last Post
2
Replies
25
Views
6K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
35
Views
7K
Replies
30
Views
5K
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
636
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
1K
Top