Investigations to find the cause of wave collapse?

[manases]

Hi,

I am very new to this, but I can't help to ask the question to which I cannot find the answer on google.

Was the process of investigating of wave collapse - split into sections - to identify which section produces the collapse?
I am a web programmer and sometimes this is a method I employ to find a bug - I simplify and reduce the possible cause until I reach the very bottom of the problem. Sometimes I (soft) delete entire files or sometimes even directories of code (I know is wild :) ) - but it gets the job done.
I employ this (extremely rarely) when nothing else works to identify - where is the cause of the problem?

The process of investigating the double split experiment - which is causing the wave to collapse - it is made of multiple parts and it must be only one part of it that is producing the collapse.

For example - if we split the experiment into multiple parts and add switches we can solve numerous problems like:
- if we add a switch to the part where we record how the wave is produced,
we do the double split experiment,
analyze the wave
but we don't record it
and the wave does not collapse
- it means that only the possibility of knowing it, collapsed the wave - it is a confirmation of the "consciousness causes collapse" theory.
Conversely, if we isolate the cause of collapsing the wave - to a physical process that interacts with the experiment, then we have infirmed the "consciousness causes collapse" theory.

This is very intuitive, it sure must have been already done.
So can you guys point me to any efforts to isolate the cause of the wave collapse, please?

 

[PeroK]

The wave function itself is not an observable. It describes the probability of getting possible outcomes from measurements of observables, such as position, momentum, energy, angular momentum, spin etc.

The collapse of the wave function is not, therefore, a physical process that has a physical cause that can be observed. It's more of a mathematical postulate: the state of a system after a measurement of observable $X$ that gives value $x_0$ is an eigenstate of the operator representing $X$ and correseponding to eigenvalue $x_0$.

That is what is meant by wave function "collapse".

Consciousness has nothing to do with it.

 

[jedishrfu]

Perhaps some of. these videos on Youtube can provide an answer foe you:





Basically you will discover that ordinary everyday logic can not be applied to Quantum Mechanics instead you must understand its math as common interpretations often fail to fully explain what is going on.

Your notion of division into parts and trying to identify which part causes collapse is misleading you too.

Here's a talk by Sean Carroll explaining the wave function and how when you have multiple electrons together in a system you have one function describing the system not a bunch of wave functions for each electron.

 

[DrChinese]

Hi,

I am very new to this, but I can't help to ask the question to which I cannot find the answer on google.

Was the process of investigating of wave collapse - split into sections - to identify which section produces the collapse?
I am a web programmer and sometimes this is a method I employ to find a bug - I simplify and reduce the possible cause until I reach the very bottom of the problem...

I'm also a software guy as well. Unfortunately, wave collapse is NOT susceptible to that type of analysis. The reasons are many, but I will walk you though an example of double slit "wave collapse" that should give you something to think about.

First, no one is sure if "wave collapse" is a physical process in the first place. Most physicists accept it as if it is real, but the various quantum interpretations deal with it in varying ways. Second, if it is "real", then it is faster than light (FTL) but cannot be tracked in any way. It appears to be instantaneous. Third, it is in some cases reversible (usually through so-called "eraser" experiments). Thus only the final measurement exhibits the collapse, invalidating any previous collapse (if that even occurred).

OK, the experiment: place 2 polarizers over a double slit which is illuminated by a beam of coherent light. Orient the polarizers parallel (say both at 0 degrees). The light forms a pattern of traditional interference. Now move one to the 90 degree position (they are now orthogonal). The light forms a pattern with NO interference present (just 2 bars). Now move the one at 90 degrees to intermediate positions (45 degrees, 10 degrees, 80 degrees, etc.) The amount of interference pattern that arises is between 0% and 100% accordingly.

What does this tell us? Clearly, we absolutely have our hands on what is causing the interference. It is the relative angle of the 2 polarizers, and nothing else. And yet, that tells us virtually nothing about the mechanism in place which truly "causing" collapse. As this is now reduced to something which is occurring a two different points in spacetime.

In fact: it is the entire CONTEXT of the experiment which must be considered. That is why QM is called a contextual theory.

 

[manases]

I need to read your answers more than once but many thanks!

I will try to understand what you mean that common logic does not apply to this.
Currently, I imagine that if we do something that collapsed the wave but we don't register anything from the process, this should produce a solid conclusion to wherever consciousness has anything with it.

It might not, but proving it, it is a different thing. For newcomers like me, or even for sci-fi people, this could be valuable.

 

[DrChinese]

...this should produce a solid conclusion to wherever consciousness has anything with it.

No experiment can prove that consciousness does NOT cause collapse to every person's satisfaction.

Of course, every experiment performed to check that shows no indication whatsoever that consciousness plays any role whatsoever. But one could always argue that the collapse did not occur until the last recording device in the chain was viewed by a human.

 

[manases]

The sci-fi I am trying to eliminate is something like
[Conjecture based on misunderstanding of QM removed]

I find this scenario an impossibility tbh - but I would like to see it verified and I am surprised is not verified at least as an experiment for kids or for beginners or for people who read about the QM for the first time and they hear about the "consciousness causes collapse theory" and they in awe for a while then...

 

[Nugatory]

The sci-fi I am trying to eliminate is something like
[Conjecture based on misunderstanding of QM removed]

I find this scenario an impossibility tbh - but I would like to see it verified and I am surprised is not verified at least as an experiment for kids or for beginners or for people who read about the QM for the first time and they hear about the "consciousness causes collapse theory" and they in awe for a while then...

You are right, it is sci-fi so out of scope for this forum - although your instinct that it is impossible is sound.

The idea that consciousness causes collapse was largely abandoned many decades ago, but still lives on in the popular imagination as a sort of urban legend - one of those things that "everyone knows" but isn't so. For a more accurate but still layman-friendly discussion of what quantum mechanics is and is not, you might want to try two books: "Sneaking a look at God's cards" by Giancarlo Ghirardi and "Where does the weirdness go?" by David Lindley.

As @DrChinese says above, there is no experimental way of disproving the idea that conciousness causes collapse - sooner or later someone has to look at the result of the experiment and it can always be argued that everything was in a superposition until then. However, pretty much every experiment involving quantum phenomenon (including the double slit experiment itself - the quantum interference pattern cannot be displayed on a screen) involves electronic detectors or photographic film recording the measurements for processing by machines. Even in the simplest cases, no human observation is involved until a piece of photographic film comes out of the tray of developing chemicals; in more modern experiments we have disk drives holding kilobytes to terabytes of measurement results before anyone looks at the result.

 

[physika]

As @DrChinese says above, there is no experimental way of disproving the idea that conciousness causes collapse

who need experiments ?

just
Logic,

Which consciousness at the beginning of the universe ?
.