Undergrad Problem of quantum tunneling and Many Worlds interpretation?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI) of quantum mechanics and its relationship with quantum tunneling. It is noted that Wikipedia claims MWI does not adequately explain quantum tunneling, specifically mentioning that a tunneling particle would exhibit more energy than observed in experiments. Participants clarify that this criticism pertains to a modification of MWI called "many interacting worlds," not to MWI itself. The consensus is that the original MWI remains consistent with quantum tunneling phenomena. Overall, the interpretation's compatibility with quantum tunneling is affirmed.
Nickyv2423
Messages
46
Reaction score
3
On wikipedia it says that MWI doesn't explain quantum tunneling well.
"A tunnelling particle would have more energy than what is actually measured in experiments."
What do you guys think?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That is an objection to a proposed modification of MWI ("many interacting worlds"), not to MWI itself. I removed it from the article.
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba
mfb said:
That is an objection to a proposed modification of MWI ("many interacting worlds"), not to MWI itself. I removed it from the article.
Oh, so original MWI is consistent with quantum tunneling?
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba
Sure.
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba
I am slowly going through the book 'What Is a Quantum Field Theory?' by Michel Talagrand. I came across the following quote: One does not" prove” the basic principles of Quantum Mechanics. The ultimate test for a model is the agreement of its predictions with experiments. Although it may seem trite, it does fit in with my modelling view of QM. The more I think about it, the more I believe it could be saying something quite profound. For example, precisely what is the justification of...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
7K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
954
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K