Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Is this good

  1. Aug 20, 2009 #1
    i tried to explain for some one how we can solve the measurement problem and i went like this

    imagine your self in a room and in this room you dont have any sense so you cant see hear touch smell or even taste

    but you have a prob attached to your brain but if you dont do the measure you wont be able to know about a man that he is in the same room with you [or woman] so for you

    the person for you are possibly in any were in the room in the same time because you cant see him or feel him

    so he/she is probably in every where for you
    you cant know where she is without doing the test

    and this is the same for the atom if i do the test measure i will be able to know all the functions of it [location ,…etc]

    and the reason is so obvious it is too small for us even for the smallest instrument.

    is it good
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 21, 2009 #2

    olgranpappy

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    IMHO, no.
     
  4. Aug 21, 2009 #3
    This description is instrumental "is too small for the smallest instrument"
    The problem with the measurement is much deeper.
     
  5. Aug 21, 2009 #4
    I think analogies can sometimes be useful aids to understanding.I can sort of see where you are going with yours but perhaps you may wish to clarify it and develop it further.
     
  6. Aug 21, 2009 #5
    why no?
     
  7. Aug 21, 2009 #6

    f95toli

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Several reasons. The most obvious being that we don't know what a measurement "is" (there is a mathematical definition, but it is not at all obvious how that translates into what we do in experiments), or even if there is such as thing as a distinct measurement "operation". We DO know that is it far more fundamental than it just being about experimental limitations (the "size of the probe" etc).
    Hence, the the basic premise of the explanation -that we know how to solve the measurement problem- is flawed.
     
  8. Aug 21, 2009 #7
    I would say... not quite, but for a different reason. You are explaining a situation where there is a definite person there with a definite location, and you are just unsure of where the person is. This implies local hidden variables. Local hidden variables have been disproven.

    There are a few different possible descriptions of what actually happens that depend on your assumptions.
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2009
  9. Aug 21, 2009 #8

    The quantum model explains that every particle behaves as a wave and its wave function collapses when you try to catch an observable. Since you can get more than an eigen value the observable would have a standard deviation and this brings to the Heisenerg's Uncertainty principle that states that no instrument would be able to measure position and speed perfectly for any particle.
     
  10. Aug 21, 2009 #9
    no i am not

    i am saying there is 2 humans one is me and the second are in the room but i cant see him

    not that i am not sure where he is or not if i do a test i will see him
    no test he is not in a specific location
    there is a possibility that he is in any where
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Is this good
Loading...