Some said 1000's of experiments support superposition but

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of superposition in quantum mechanics, particularly whether a particle can be in two mutually exclusive states simultaneously. Participants explore the implications of experimental results, the nature of state vectors, and the interpretation of measurements in quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that experimental results do not support the idea of superposition, claiming that measured results are not superposition states and that there are finite outcomes for discrete observables.
  • Others argue that any state vector can be expressed in an infinite number of superpositions depending on the basis chosen, suggesting that this does not imply the particle is in multiple states simultaneously.
  • There is a discussion about the uniqueness of state vectors, with some participants stating that a particle is never in two different states from different rays in Hilbert space.
  • Concerns are raised about the interpretation of superposition, with some participants emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between observables and states, and the complexity of determining a state through measurements.
  • One participant challenges the notion that expressing a state as a linear combination of mutually exclusive states in one basis justifies the claim of simultaneous existence in multiple states.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express significant disagreement regarding the interpretation of superposition and the implications of experimental results. No consensus is reached on whether superposition implies simultaneous existence in multiple states.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of understanding vector spaces and the mathematical framework of quantum mechanics to fully grasp the implications of superposition and measurement outcomes.

  • #31
Don't start again the collapse debate. My opinion is well-known: There's no justification of it, it's not needed, and it's contradicting fundamental properties of relativistic QFT. There's Born's rule, giving the physical meaning of the quantum state, and nothing else.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
vanhees71 said:
The answer is very simple and known since 1928,
... and answers the OP's initial question.
vanhees71 said:
I think this thread is overdue to be closed!
Agreed, the more as it seems we're steering towards another subject, which by the way has already dozens of threads that can be read.

Thread closed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman and vanhees71

Similar threads

Graduate Understanding superposition of states
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Graduate Experiments probing the macroscopic limits of QM
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
12K
Undergrad Can the "measurement problem" just be an "epistemological ambiguity"?
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Undergrad Bell vs Kolmogorov: Unravelling Probability Theory Limits
  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
7K
Graduate Is delayed choice remote entanglement of photons derived from TDSE?
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
Graduate Practical examples of superposition?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
14K
Undergrad Do Bob's measurement choices affect Alice's?
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
Undergrad What is the relationship between events and outcomes in quantum theories?
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Undergrad Arguments against instantaneous collapse
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Undergrad Non-locality by memory (Jung, 2020) applied to stochastic mechanics
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K