Is it possible that god does not play dice with the universe, as Einstein said?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter KarminValso1724
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dice Einstein Universe
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the concept of true randomness in the universe, referencing Einstein's assertion that "God does not play dice." It highlights the implications of Bell's Theorem, which suggests that non-local components must exist to maintain causality. The conversation also touches on various interpretations of quantum mechanics, noting that some, like the deterministic interpretations, do not incorporate randomness. The challenge of testing these interpretations is acknowledged, particularly in relation to wavefunction collapse and decoherence.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Bell's Theorem
  • Familiarity with interpretations of quantum mechanics
  • Knowledge of wavefunction collapse
  • Concept of decoherence in quantum physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of Bell's Theorem on quantum mechanics
  • Explore different interpretations of quantum mechanics, focusing on deterministic models
  • Investigate methods for testing wavefunction collapse and its alternatives
  • Study the role of decoherence in quantum systems and its impact on randomness
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, quantum mechanics enthusiasts, and anyone interested in the philosophical implications of randomness and determinism in the universe.

KarminValso1724
Messages
25
Reaction score
1
How could it be tested that there exists true randomness in the universe? One could simply argue that the is information that we do not posses that causes the outcome of a measurement to occur, right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
KarminValso1724 said:
How could it be tested that there exists true randomness in the universe? One could simply argue that the is information that we do not posses that causes the outcome of a measurement to occur, right?

Sure, there could be information and relationships which are not known to us. They must include non-local components if causality is to be retained (per Bell's Theorem).
 
Some interpretations of quantum mechanics do not have randomness. If you look at the table in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_quantum_mechanics
the first column is deterministic.

For the most part, if a collapse of the wavefunction occurs, then it is a random process. But if there is no true collapse of the wavefunction, only an apparent one, then it is deterministic.

It's not easy to test these interpretations, which is why they are called interpretations and not theories, but people do sometimes claim to test decoherence, which seems to be the popular belief these days.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mfb

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
6K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
6K