Insights Blog
-- Browse All Articles --
Physics Articles
Physics Tutorials
Physics Guides
Physics FAQ
Math Articles
Math Tutorials
Math Guides
Math FAQ
Education Articles
Education Guides
Bio/Chem Articles
Technology Guides
Computer Science Tutorials
Forums
Classical Physics
Quantum Physics
Quantum Interpretations
Special and General Relativity
Atomic and Condensed Matter
Nuclear and Particle Physics
Beyond the Standard Model
Cosmology
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Other Physics Topics
Trending
Featured Threads
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Classical Physics
Quantum Physics
Quantum Interpretations
Special and General Relativity
Atomic and Condensed Matter
Nuclear and Particle Physics
Beyond the Standard Model
Cosmology
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Other Physics Topics
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Physics
Quantum Physics
Question about superposition and measurement
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="edenenix15, post: 5508516, member: 582204"] Hello everyone. I've gotten interested in quantum mechanics after binge watching a ton of documentaries about it. I've grown particularly interested in superpositions and the measurement problem. I'm not very good at math, so I can't understand the math behind it, but I like to take the information from theories and experiments and use that information to come to conclusions. Out of all those documentaries and educational videos explaining quantum mechanics that I saw, I haven't seen anyone mention what I'm going to ask about. Please correct me if I get any of this wrong but it seems all of them are saying that a "thing" (a particle, atom, object, ect) can only be in one of two states: a complete superposition where no particular quality of it is collapsed and defined, OR a much more definite state (but not completely definite because of the uncertainty principle I think). And the collapse of that "thing" happens when something measures it. This made me think: "then why is it I trip over a rock, even though I did not see it there?" And: "why do, for example, new planets we discover have the specific particular and persistent qualities even when we stop measuring them?". The conclusion I've come to after asking these questions is what I want to ask about. Instead of a whole particle switching from wave of superposition into a particle with definite qualities when measured, is it possible that what actually switches from a superposition to definite position instead is merely the qualities of the particle rather than the whole particle itself? I think this would make a lot of sense. For example: before an electron is fired at slits in a double slit experiment, while the electron is contained in the reservoir and assuming the electron is not moving in the reservoir, instead of it being a wave, it would have a different form? Because it seems to me that waves, in order to exist, they have to have velocity. If that's true, and if an electron has no velocity, then its not possible for it to act like a wave. Rather than its velocity having a superposition, only its momentum and all other qualities that have not interacted with other objects are in superposition while its velocity is collapsed. If that's accurate then I think it means, as particles are sent into motion, they act like waves. And as they smack into other particle's waves in the void of space, the resulting interference pattern becomes collapsed and definite, while their position is still in superposition. This should mean even their velocity is collapsed and not in superposition. I remembered the documentaries I watched saying something about how the details we find in nature depend on the kinds of questions we ask. When they say this, do they mean that particles can have qualities that are collapsed, and qualities that are in superposition at the same time like I said above? Or has this idea never considered? Or has it been considered and been disproven? Please let me know what you think, thanks. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Post reply
Forums
Physics
Quantum Physics
Question about superposition and measurement
Back
Top