How do hidden variables supposedly explain radioactive decay?

In summary, the argument for true stochastic behavior of QM systems is a strong one, but some scientists still hold out for deterministic rules.
  • #1
BWV
1,465
1,780
If individual atoms are indistinguishable from one another, then how can you tell if atom A will experience radioactive decay before identical atom B? ISTM there would have to be some underlying structure beyond electrons and quarks and unique to each atom / particle to be able to do this. This seems like a strong argument for true stochastic behavior of QM systems, but a sizeable minority of real scientists who understand QM still hold out for deterministic rules, so what am I missing?
 
  • Like
Likes PeroK
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
There are many random phenomenona that can in principle be explained by a deterministic hidden variable theory; for example we accept the results of a coin toss as random even though with a complete specification of all the variables involved we could calculate the exact trajectory of the coin and how it will land.

Before the discovery of quantum mechanics, it was easy to believe that all randomness could be viewed in this way, not as a fundamental non-determinism in the operation of the universe but rather as a result of our incomplete knowledge of the deterministic conditions at work. When non-determinism appeared in quantum mechanics, at first it seemed natural to make the same assumption that the apparent randomness reflected only our ignorance of some "real" underlying deterministic theory; this thinking was behind the the EPR assertion that QM was incomplete and the famous soundbite about God not playing dice.

A century of failure to find any such theory, and Bell's proof that if we do find such a theory it will be no less offensive to our classical intuition than quantum randomness have taken most of the fun out of this line of thought.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes mattt, BWV, haushofer and 1 other person
  • #3
QM, as a physical theory that makes predictions about the probabilities of various results of measurements, cannot answer the questions you are asking. Various QM interpretations give different answers to them--further discussion of that should really be done in the QM interpretations forum. However, QM interpretations don't give any way of testing different alternatives, since they all make the same predictions for all experimental results. Unless and until we find a more comprehensive theory to which our current QM is an approximation, we won't be able to do anything more than speculate.
 
  • Like
Likes mattt, BWV and vanhees71
  • #4
BWV said:
If individual atoms are indistinguishable from one another, then how can you tell if atom A will experience radioactive decay before identical atom B? ISTM there would have to be some underlying structure beyond electrons and quarks and unique to each atom / particle to be able to do this. This seems like a strong argument for true stochastic behavior of QM systems, but a sizeable minority of real scientists who understand QM still hold out for deterministic rules, so what am I missing?
Your question cannot be answered without talking about quantum interpretations, which is considered appropriate only if the thread gets moved to the appropriate subforum.
 
  • Like
Likes atyy
  • #5
Then can it be moved to the appropriate location?
 
  • #6
BWV said:
can it be moved to the appropriate location?

Done. Please note, however, that this changes the thread level to "I", since it's not really possible to discuss QM interpretations at the "B" level (even basic QM without digging into interpretations is hard to discuss at the "B" level).
 
  • #7
BWV said:
If individual atoms are indistinguishable from one another, then how can you tell if atom A will experience radioactive decay before identical atom B? ISTM there would have to be some underlying structure beyond electrons and quarks and unique to each atom / particle to be able to do this. This seems like a strong argument for true stochastic behavior of QM systems, but a sizeable minority of real scientists who understand QM still hold out for deterministic rules, so what am I missing?
The indistinguishability is a property of the wave function. But the Bohmian interpretation (which is the best known hidden variable interpretation) says that particles are more than a wave function, so hidden variables make particles distinguishable. I think it answers your question, but if not feel free to ask for additional clarifications.
 
  • Like
Likes BWV

1. What are hidden variables?

Hidden variables are hypothetical properties or factors that are not directly observable but are thought to influence the behavior of a system.

2. How do hidden variables explain radioactive decay?

Hidden variables are often proposed as a way to explain the seemingly random and unpredictable nature of radioactive decay. It suggests that there are underlying factors that determine when and how a radioactive atom will decay, rather than it being completely random.

3. Can hidden variables be proven to exist?

No, hidden variables are purely hypothetical and cannot be proven to exist. They are a theoretical concept used to explain certain phenomena in physics.

4. Are hidden variables accepted by the scientific community?

The concept of hidden variables is a highly debated topic in the scientific community. While some scientists believe they may exist and help explain certain phenomena, others argue that they are not necessary and that the randomness of radioactive decay can be explained by other theories.

5. How do hidden variables impact our understanding of radioactive decay?

The idea of hidden variables challenges our current understanding of radioactive decay and raises questions about the true nature of randomness in the universe. It also highlights the limitations of our current scientific theories and the need for further research and exploration in this field.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
25
Views
11K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top