Probability and quantum possibilities

NanaToru
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
So this might be a too simplistic question on many accounts.

My pchem professor said to us that in QM, anything that can happen will. And it's a matter of probability, right?

I guess I'm just curious what the scales are for something like, say, walking through a wall (the go-to example for a lot of popular science books on QM)? Like, 1 in a billion or what?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
NanaToru said:
My pchem professor said to us that in QM, anything that can happen will. And it's a matter of probability, right?

Not quite. It says that anything that can happen, well, can happen. (It is not guaranteed to happen) Yes it is a matter of probability. But don't take this to mean that all of reality and life is probability. Even if it is you don't live your life in fear that every particle in your body is going to quantum tunnel in random directions at the same time.

I guess I'm just curious what the scales are for something like, say, walking through a wall (the go-to example for a lot of popular science books on QM)? Like, 1 in a billion or what?

1 in a billion ^1023. Actually I don't know the right number, and I doubt anyone actually does, but I guarantee it to be so large it is effectively incomprehensible.
 
The likelihood of that happening is so low that the universe is far too young for that to be an outcome.

At least, most likely. :smile: You never know, maybe something like that has happened.
 
Drakkith said:
1 in a billion ^1023. Actually I don't know the right number, and I doubt anyone actually does, but I guarantee it to be so large it is effectively incomprehensible.

That number probably does the odds some justice. I remember calculating the probability of jumping and tunneling all the way to Jupiter, and it was like e^{10^{10^6}} or something. I don't even remember now.

It should be noted that anything that can happen will happen with enough time. Even the probability above says that if the universe lasts long enough, a tunneling event of that magnitude should likely happen.
 
soothsayer said:
That number probably does the odds some justice. I remember calculating the probability of jumping and tunneling all the way to Jupiter, and it was like e^{10^{10^6}} or something. I don't even remember now.

It should be noted that anything that can happen will happen with enough time. Even the probability above says that if the universe lasts long enough, a tunneling event of that magnitude should likely happen.

My god that's an enormous number.
 
It may have been smaller, I can't remember now XD It was definitely e^10 to a really big power, but it may have been closer to 100 than one million. At that point though, what's the difference, really? It's not going to happen, lol.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
25
Views
3K
Replies
63
Views
7K
Replies
0
Views
8K
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Back
Top