Is this a new theory, an enhanced theory or just philosophy?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ftr
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Philosophy Qm Theory
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of the Frauchiger-Renner paper on quantum theory, particularly its philosophical and theoretical interpretations. Participants explore whether the ideas presented constitute a new theory, an enhancement of existing theories, or merely philosophical musings. The scope includes theoretical implications, interpretations of quantum mechanics, and the validity of assumptions made in the paper.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the assumptions made in the Frauchiger-Renner paper, particularly regarding the certainty of agents within quantum experiments.
  • Concerns are raised about the deterministic assumptions applied to agents in a probabilistic quantum context, suggesting that the authors may overlook the inherent uncertainties of quantum mechanics.
  • Others argue that the paper's abstract nature and use of unconventional notation may lead to misunderstandings, though such notations are common in certain fields.
  • Some participants propose that the Many Worlds interpretation could provide insights into the paper's conclusions, questioning the assumptions about measurement and observer roles.
  • There is a suggestion that the paper may not adequately account for the implications of entanglement and the interconnectedness of measurements in quantum systems.
  • A few participants reference external discussions and critiques of the paper, indicating that it has been a topic of extensive debate in the community.
  • One participant mentions a belief that probability interpretations may complicate the understanding of quantum theories, advocating for a geometric approach instead.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the validity of the Frauchiger-Renner paper or its implications. Multiple competing views are presented regarding the interpretation of quantum mechanics, the role of observers, and the assumptions made in the paper.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include unresolved questions about the assumptions underlying the paper, the dependence on interpretations of quantum mechanics, and the potential for misinterpretation of abstract concepts and notations used in the discussion.

  • #31
But none of the above authors mention anywhere that ##f(t,x)## and ##g(t,x)## would represent two different kinds of particles...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
vanhees71 said:
It's utter nonsense to begin with. There's no "photon wave function" to begin with, because there's no position representation for photon states, because there's no photon position operator definable.
ftr said:
I am no expert in the field but many papers like following seem to be genuine physics.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003491616300173
Auto-Didact said:
Bialynicki-Birula is definitely a serious theoretician who has a long record of multiple insightful works; I have read some of his work in the past. If one is willing to disparage his work as 'nonsense' then I believe practically no theorist is safe from criticism.
The confusion is explained by the fact that the term ''wave function'' is ambiguous.

If the term is reserved for the position representation with Born's probability interpretation then vanhees71 is right. But there is a wave function in the momentum representation with a proper probability interpretation, and Bialynicki-Birula discusses its Fourier transform, which also deserves the name ''wave function''. Though it doesn't have a probability interpretation it completely describes the state.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mattt and Auto-Didact

Similar threads

Graduate MOND Theory Primer: Stacy McGaugh's Research Program Explored
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
Undergrad A Bold New Take on Quantum Theory
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
6K
Undergrad What false hints of new physics were most notable?
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
9K
Graduate Discussing Predictions of the LHC: String Theory, LQG, and Beyond
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Graduate It all began with an end - New theory on origin and future of the universe
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 241)
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K