QM Misconceptions

  • Thread starter thenewmans
  • Start date
  • #1
166
1
Please tell me if these statements are correct.

There are several interpretations of the QM theory that do not violate QM. They each may use different formulas or methods but the results all match QM.

Although some interpretations include a wave collapse, this does not necessarily mean that something actually does happen instantaneously across a distance. There are other interpretations that do not include instantaneous action at a distance.

That goes for super position and observation causing collapse as well. There are some interpretations that do not include these things yet still agree with QM.

Entanglement was accurately predicted by QM. It is used today for encrypted communication. Yet it cannot be used for faster-than-light communication.

The EPR paradox paper has been successfully argued and the paradox has been resolved. This does not mean that there actually is instant action at a distance.

So far all alternatives to instant action at a distance also break some part of classical realism. Instant action at a distance breaks local realism. The most common alternative is for the effect to travel back in time, which breaks causality.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
80
0
There are several interpretations of the QM theory that do not violate QM. They each may use different formulas or methods but the results all match QM.
There are several interpretations. If they violated QM then they would be nonstarters as an interpretation of QM. I don't think any of them necessarily use different formulas or methods.

Although some interpretations include a wave collapse, this does not necessarily mean that something actually does happen instantaneously across a distance. There are other interpretations that do not include instantaneous action at a distance.
I would agree with the first sentence.

That goes for super position and observation causing collapse as well. There are some interpretations that do not include these things yet still agree with QM.
I don't know of any interpretation which suggests that superposition is a cause of collapse. Observation yes. I think that
all interpretations require collapse or some equivalent.

Entanglement was accurately predicted by QM. It is used today for encrypted communication. Yet it cannot be used for faster-than-light communication.
Yes to all but the last sentence.

The EPR paradox paper has been successfully argued and the paradox has been resolved. This does not mean that there actually is instant action at a distance.
Agreed.

So far all alternatives to instant action at a distance also break some part of classical realism. Instant action at a distance breaks local realism. The most common alternative is for the effect to travel back in time, which breaks causality.
Don't know.
 

Related Threads on QM Misconceptions

Replies
5
Views
853
  • Last Post
Replies
17
Views
960
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
52
Views
3K
Replies
19
Views
8K
Replies
10
Views
516
Top